If We Close Down All Mosques; Eliminate All Korans. THEN What ?

[JakeStarkey]

You are the fool, Protectionist.

Your political philosophy is shit, and your religious beliefs are right there as well.

 

[protectionist]

What would be the effect of shutting Islam down in the US ? That is, by closing down all the mosques and eliminating all the Korans from libraries, schools, bookstores, and wherever they could be obtained.

It would imperil any religion as it would require a wholesale abandonment of the 1st amendment's protections for religion. If it could be done to Islam, it could be done to any religion.

I imagine the biggest winner in such a scenario would be militant atheists, who want to see all religion scrubbed from society. Stripping Americans of religious freedom entirely would be a powerful step in that direction.

Islam is not a religion. And yes, it COULD be done to religions. And it SHOULD be done to them > IF THEY ARE SUPREMACIST.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

We are like small children pulling the wings of a grounded bee who had been foolishly trying to sting us.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Islam is not a religion. And yes, it COULD be done to religions. And it SHOULD be done to them > IF THEY ARE SUPREMACIST.

Of course it is a religion, and of course you are an idiot.

 

[protectionist]

You are the fool, Protectionist.

Your political philosophy is shit, and your religious beliefs are right there as well.

You are consistent. Consistent absent of substance, Mr. Hot air.

 

[protectionist]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

We are like small children pulling the wings of a grounded bee who had been foolishly trying to sting us.

I won't even try to figure out what on earth that was supposed to mean /

 

[Kondor3]

"If We Close Down All Mosques; Eliminate All Korans. THEN What ?"

You would first need to amend the Constitution repealing the First Amendment.

Good luck with that.

True.

The only way around that would be to obtain a high-level judicial ruling that Islam is not a religion, but a hostile and hybrid cultural-social-legal-political-governance system with a strong spiritual component to it - de-emphasizing the spiritual and emphasizing the temporal sufficiently to take it off the Protected List, so to speak. Probably not gonna happen; at least, not without the advent of extreme conditions driving such an outcome. Then again, I would not rule-out Islamists forcing such a development.

Forcing such a development? No one could force Americans to do something so obviously stupid, Americans would have to do that for themselves.

Yes, forcing such a development. Can you not conceive of circumstances under which the US Government would strive for such a judicial ruling, on behalf of The Nation and The People?

I can.

I'll give you a clue.

Think in terms of additional large-scale attacks by Militant Muslims against the United States, and see where that takes you, in a worst-case scenario.

I'll give you another clue, with regard to precedent: think Japanese-Americans during the 1941-1945 timeframe. And an updated, modern-day need, to rationalize or authorize 'harsh measures' from a legal perspective.

That should be enough to get any objective and imaginative person started with such conjuring.

 

[koshergrl]

It has nothing to do with "feewings" and "emoootions". It's about the Constitutional protection of religion in this country. No more. No less. We prefer to leave the "feewings" to you when you protest the building of mosques, or try to pass anti-constituional laws.

You are violating the rules of this forum. You are harassing/trolling, by repeating the same nonsense over and over which I have repeatedly refuted. You et al are trying o derail this thread. You are a bad cop.

Your hypothetical situation has everything to do with both the Constitution and freedom of religion in this country. .

Post # 186 answered this (along with about 2 dozen other ones). You're a derailer.

Bullshit. You loons seriously maintain that posting supporting evidence (multiple links to multiple sites that support the poster's commentary) is *spam*. You ridicule educated posters who submit verification that their views are supported and accepted....it just floors me. It used to be just a couple of you guys did this, but it's becoming a theme.

It proves you're uneducated ignorami who have no clue what the hell you're talking about. In the world of *ideas* and *debate* the objective is to support your claim by providing outside sources that concur and show the reason behind it. It isn't just to spout off about your OWN PERSONAL reasons for believing something.

You reject fact and reality, supplant it with propaganda and fantasy, and then pretend facts are *spam*.

Shut up fool. I've been posting all through this thread, 90% of it without links. You're talking like an idiot.

Yes, I know.

It's just blithering. Then you ridicule and attack anyone who DOES support their commentary.

Thanks for proving my point. You're an ignoramus. Your personal opinions prove nothing except that you have a high opinion of yourself.

 

[Kondor3]

Doesn't matter as this is unconstitutional. You have a legally protected right to be Muslim and observe the non-violent aspects of Islam.

NO you do NOT have a legally protected right to be Muslim. And since the Muslim ideology (masquerading as a religion) is supremacist, it is therefore unconstitutional/illegal.

Just because you don't believe a religion is not a religion does mean it's not. It's legally protected under the Constitution of this country along with your own faith.

Quite true.

Islam is protected as a Religion at present, under the United States Constitution.

Successfully challenge its legal standing as a Religion, however, and such protections disappear.

Not that I think it's actually going to happen, mind you (and I would have mixed - and possibly mostly negative - feelings about that if it did) but that would be the approach vector to remove its Religious status, insofar as first thoughts on the subject take me.

Not gonna happen... unless we get backed into a corner where it is perceived to be in our best security interests to do so.

 

[Liminal]

"If We Close Down All Mosques; Eliminate All Korans. THEN What ?"

You would first need to amend the Constitution repealing the First Amendment.

Good luck with that.

True.

The only way around that would be to obtain a high-level judicial ruling that Islam is not a religion, but a hostile and hybrid cultural-social-legal-political-governance system with a strong spiritual component to it - de-emphasizing the spiritual and emphasizing the temporal sufficiently to take it off the Protected List, so to speak. Probably not gonna happen; at least, not without the advent of extreme conditions driving such an outcome. Then again, I would not rule-out Islamists forcing such a development.

Forcing such a development? No one could force Americans to do something so obviously stupid, Americans would have to do that for themselves.

Yes, forcing such a development. Can you not conceive of circumstances under which the US Government would strive for such a judicial ruling, on behalf of The Nation and The People? I can. I'll give you a clue. Think in terms of additional large-scale attacks by Militant Muslims against the United States, and see where that takes you, in a worst-case scenario. I'll give you another clue, with regard to precedent: think Japanese-Americans during the 1941-1945 timeframe. And an updated, modern-day need, to rationalize or authorize 'harsh measures' from a legal perspective. That should be enough to get any objective and imaginative person started.

Based on your thin logic the same ruling could be made about Mormons.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Based on the silly logic, the argument could be made against any religion, and how fortunate we are to realize that the Founders had idiots like Protectionist from whom to protect America.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

We are like small children pulling the wings of a grounded bee who had been foolishly trying to sting us.

I won't even try to figure out what on earth that was supposed to mean /

Could you please explain to me why you changed the Hitler quote?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Protectionist, tell him why you changed the Hitler quotation?

 

[Skylar]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

Not enough to close so much as a window at a mosque. Let alone purge our nation of an entire religion based on your personal opinion.

We're not destroying religious liberty in the US because you don't like Islam.

 

[Redfish]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

Not enough to close so much as a window at a mosque. Let alone purge our nation of an entire religion based on your personal opinion.

We're not destroying religious liberty in the US because you don't like Islam.

I agree, however, we must not allow pockets of sharia law anywhere in the USA. We must demand that every person in this country be subject to US law and nothing else.

Thats the danger that protecionist and others are alluding to---------that we will give sanction to sharia law in this country and try to have it operate in parallel with US law.

 

[Skylar]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

Not enough to close so much as a window at a mosque. Let alone purge our nation of an entire religion based on your personal opinion.

We're not destroying religious liberty in the US because you don't like Islam.

I agree, however, we must not allow pockets of sharia law anywhere in the USA. We must demand that every person in this country be subject to US law and nothing else.

The 'pocket' argument is some pretty weak tea. Boiling down to a 2012 video in Michigan where some Christians stirred shit with Muslims at a festival and the Muslims overreacted, and another video of some guy driving slowly while he's told to go away.

Thats the danger that protecionist and others are alluding to---------that we will give sanction to sharia law in this country and try to have it operate in parallel with US law.

Protectionist isn't 'alluding' to anything. He's saying, straight up, that Islam isn't a religion. And that it should be purged everywhere it exists in the US. Every mosque. Every Koran. In every bookstore.

Not merely 'pockets'.

 

[Syriusly]

That is for YOU to do. That's YOUR job here. I posed the question (Notice the title ends in a QUESTION MARK ?)

You set up a mythical situation where a religion could be banned. Surely you must have ideas - don't be shy now.

You want my answer? American's band together to restore the Constitution's protection of religion. We protest, allow Muslims to worship in our homes, hide them from arrest, join them and show solidarity with our fellow Americans and make sure every politician who voted for this is voted out.

Yes, well you're an idiot.

We don't arrest muslims for being muslims. The French did this shit, and look what it got them.

Thank goodness, the majority of the population in this country recognize what a stupid, and dangerous, thing it is to accommodate extremism.

Speaking of idiots - you didn't read what I posted did you? In his proposed scenario Mosques would be shut down and Korans banned. So are you going to arrest Muslims for having a Koran? For worshipping in other places? Where exactly is this scenario going?

Nobody is arresting Muslims for those things. And they won't.

It's a non issue.

exactly correct. the left wingers are trying to say that if sharia law is banned then mosques are banned. nothing is further from the truth. but we all know that liberals do not deal in truth. their world is a world of fantasy, feeeeeeeeeeeeeelings, and emooooooooooooootions.

Yet Redfish and Kosher- two of our most outspoken 'Conservatives'

Never respond to Protectionist's actual bizarre unconstitutional posts.

They just complain as usual about liberals.

Its almost like Protectionist and his thread don't exist and they only see liberals' posting in a vacuum.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

Not enough to close so much as a window at a mosque. Let alone purge our nation of an entire religion based on your personal opinion.

We're not destroying religious liberty in the US because you don't like Islam.

I agree, however, we must not allow pockets of sharia law anywhere in the USA. We must demand that every person in this country be subject to US law and nothing else.

Thats the danger that protecionist and others are alluding to---------that we will give sanction to sharia law in this country and try to have it operate in parallel with US law.

If I thought there was a real threat that Sharia Law would be allowed to supersede U.S. Law, I would be concerned too. But I've never seen anything like that happen before, so I do not consider that a real threat.

 

[Syriusly]

Looniest sstatement of the day is "Mosques are not houses of religion. Islam is not a religion. And religions, like anything else can be restricted (and banned 100%) if they are supremacist, and therefore in violation of Article 6, Section 2, of the Constitution."

The workings of Protectionist's mind should lead to its renaming as Projectionist. What a strange little critter is he.

Our law recognizes Islam as a religion. And mosques as places of worship.

Protectionist disagrees. Who gives a shit?

YOU DO. That's why you're here.

Not enough to close so much as a window at a mosque. Let alone purge our nation of an entire religion based on your personal opinion.

We're not destroying religious liberty in the US because you don't like Islam.

I agree, however, we must not allow pockets of sharia law anywhere in the USA. We must demand that every person in this country be subject to US law and nothing else..

Every person in the U.S. is subject to U.S. law.

If anyone wants to subject them to internal religious authority- like Jewish religious law, Mormon religious law or Shariah law to deal with disputes within their own religious community- well that is no different than if the Shriners decide amongst themselves to use an arbiter to decide disputes between neighbors.

 

[Syriusly]

Doesn't matter as this is unconstitutional. You have a legally protected right to be Muslim and observe the non-violent aspects of Islam.

NO you do NOT have a legally protected right to be Muslim. And since the Muslim ideology (masquerading as a religion) is supremacist, it is therefore unconstitutional/illegal.

Just because you don't believe a religion is not a religion does mean it's not. It's legally protected under the Constitution of this country along with your own faith.

Quite true.

Islam is protected as a Religion at present, under the United States Constitution.

Successfully challenge its legal standing as a Religion, however, and such protections disappear.

Not that I think it's actually going to happen, mind you (and I would have mixed - and possibly mostly negative - feelings about that if it did) but that would be the approach vector to remove its Religious status, insofar as first thoughts on the subject take me.

Not gonna happen... unless we get backed into a corner where it is perceived to be in our best security interests to do so.

But if that ever does happen- then no religious group in America is protected by the Constitution again.