Now Who's Trying To Infringe Your Constitutional Rights?

[Annie]

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/01/free-to-say-what.html

It's long, this is from the middle:

...

...If you think I’m being paranoid or overreacting, then you haven’t seen Rep. John Conyers’ proposed kid-gloves-for-the-Koran resolution, H. Res. 288 (the full text is here):

Resolved, That the House of Representatives —

1. condemns bigotry, acts of violence, and intolerance against any religious group, including our friends, neighbors, and citizens of the Islamic faith;
2. declares that the civil rights and civil liberties of all individuals, including those of the Islamic faith, should be protected;
3. recognizes that the Quran, the holy book of Islam, as any other holy book of any religion, should be treated with dignity and respect; and
4. calls upon local, State, and Federal authorities to work to prevent bias-motivated crimes and acts against all individuals, including those of the Islamic faith.

This is pernicious on so many levels that it’s hard to know where to start. It asserts that one person’s right to be respected overrides another person’s right to speak freely. It singles out a single religion, Islam, for special treatment. It accords the holy book of the Muslims more respect than is owed the flag of the United States.

This is a CAIR-sponsored Trojan horse, ready to be rolled through the gates into the First Amendment. And its sponsor is about to become chairman of the House Judiciary Committee...

 

[Avatar4321]

The government. They are the only ones who can. which is why the constitution limited its power.

 

[Annie]

The government. They are the only ones who can. which is why the constitution limited its power.

Well it seems to me that there is a chorus of those that were so upset about personal liberties. Now a majority, they really want to shut us up!

 

[SpidermanTuba]

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/01/free-to-say-what.html

It's long, this is from the middle:

I'm having trouble finding where in that quotation the bill states that the Koran is accorded more respect than the U.S. flag.

 

[Annie]

I'm having trouble finding where in that quotation the bill states that the Koran is accorded more respect than the U.S. flag.

skip the editorializing that is done and look at the bill.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

skip the editorializing that is done and look at the bill.

I read the bill. It doesn't even mention the United States flag, nor does it afford any special rights to Muslims.

 

[Annie]

I read the bill. It doesn't even mention the United States flag, nor does it afford any special rights to Muslims.

So Spidey, you would be happy with it?

H. Res. 288 (the full text is here):

Resolved, That the House of Representatives —

1. condemns bigotry, acts of violence, and intolerance against any religious group, including our friends, neighbors, and citizens of the Islamic faith;
2. declares that the civil rights and civil liberties of all individuals, including those of the Islamic faith, should be protected;
3. recognizes that the Quran, the holy book of Islam, as any other holy book of any religion, should be treated with dignity and respect; and
4. calls upon local, State, and Federal authorities to work to prevent bias-motivated crimes and acts against all individuals, including those of the Islamic faith.

 

[jillian]

So Spidey, you would be happy with it?

I don't think you addressed his point.

I don't think there's anything wrong with respect. I would expect the same to be given to your holy books and my own. The sad part is that someone needed to say it and it wasn't presumed.

 

[Annie]

I don't think you addressed his point.

I don't think there's anything wrong with respect. I would expect the same to be given to your holy books and my own. The sad part is that someone needed to say it and it wasn't presumed.

So you would be happy if the bill became law? You did read the bill, right?

 

[jillian]

So you would be happy if the bill became law? You did read the bill, right?

I read what was quoted in the article. Spidey pointed out that there was nothing nefarious in what was in the article.


Instead of responding, you're responding with another question.

 

[Annie]

I read what was quoted in the article. Spidey pointed out that there was nothing nefarious in what was in the article.


Instead of responding, you're responding with another question.

and neither of you are addressing the bill. We don't get to pick how others respond, right Jillian?

 

[jillian]

and neither of you are addressing the bill. We don't get to pick how others respond, right Jillian?

Well, that's true. But I presume that if you posted it, you have an opinion. You seem to think it's nefarious. I don't see it from the blog thing you posted. So, you can point out where it says Islam has greater rights, or you can choose not to have a dialogue on the subject. Up to you. Me? I enjoy discussing issues. *shrug*

 

[Annie]

Well, that's true. But I presume that if you posted it, you have an opinion. You seem to think it's nefarious. I don't see it from the blog thing you posted. So, you can point out where it says Islam has greater rights, or you can choose not to have a dialogue on the subject. Up to you. Me? I enjoy discussing issues. *shrug*

First read the bill, which was my original point. Then if you want we can argue the editorial content from the blogger, otherwise...

 

[SpidermanTuba]

So Spidey, you would be happy with it?

Happy with what? I'm still trying to figure out why the author thinks it afford special rights to Muslims, or how it accords more dignity to the Koran than to the Flag. You mind explaining that to me first, then we can move on from there.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

So you would be happy if the bill became law? You did read the bill, right?

What does this even have to do with my question?

You're trying to make a point about a bill and I have a question about that point. If it indeed places the Koran above the Flag and afford Muslims special rights - as the author claims - then I am against it. Trouble is, I'm having trouble seeing how this claim is true. The word "flag" isn't even in the bill, nor do I see anywhere that Muslims are given special rights. Please tell me how this is so, then I will make up my mind.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

and neither of you are addressing the bill. We don't get to pick how others respond, right Jillian?

Yes, I am. I want you to show me where in the bill it gives special protections to Muslims and afford more dignity to the Koran than the Flag - but you have utterly failed in this regard.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

First read the bill, which was my original point. Then if you want we can argue the editorial content from the blogger, otherwise...

What for? I read the bill, and you still won't tell me where it says Muslims have more rights.

 

[roadhouse158]

I don't know for sure, but I assume that they are saying that there is nothing in the constitution about respecting the flag. Damn... The things some of you will not drop. You can burn the American Flag and it's ok. I personally don't like the fact that they are singling out Muslims in this bill. IMO the Democrats of today are acting like they were always the ones that were picked on when they were growing up. So now they say it's ok to be whatever you are. What if your a lunatic that wants to die for your God? What if you feel you have a RESPONSIBLITY and a RIGHT to kill any non Muslim. Well. Dems are for their rights too. Grow up and pay attention. It's in the damn Quaran. Let me guess. You have read the Quran. Bite me. If any of you have read it and actually comprehended it, you would be appauld. Yeah introduce the Quaran into the Constitution and a Radical Muslim can easily commit murder and say he had a constitutional right. Ten years ago I wouldn't have believed this, but today I believe you can get away with murder if you study the constitution enough. People are truly abusing what it says. Bush is; But not more then the Democrats. Both parties are abusing it. Too easy today. Might as well throw it out.

 

[Annie]

Ok people, bottom line-I would be against a flag burning law, always have, always will be. I'm also against people being victims of the so called, 'hate crimes', actually any crime at all particularly violent crime.

With that out of the way, government from all levels has been expanding their reach into our personal behavior, property, and now they are after speech. I've often heard arguments about 'in Europe it's against the law to deny the holocaust' and so it is. Not here, but this could change it.

That Islam is brought up at all is besides the point, you are trying to read something into that, perhaps because of the editorializing, which is why I said, 'read the bill'. The fact that Islam is singled out actually shows more about the author and seconds to the bill, than it does about prejudice of my own. Still you miss it.

If such a resolution made it to the law stage, all of our political speech would be threatened.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Dear lady, what of Chimpy McPresident's most recent signing statement?

You know, the one which grants him the power to have our mail opened without a warrant? First, it is warrant-less wire-tapping, then it is the monitoring of e-mails and other internet traffic, now this. And you ask "Who's trying to infringe on your Constitutional rights?"

It should be obvious to anyone, at this point, that the Constitution means little more to this administration than a road-block to its unbridled lust for power.

<blockquote>"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it," - George W. Bush, 07/30/2001</blockquote>

<blockquote>"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." - George W. Bush, 12/18/2000</blockquote>

<blockquote>"You don't get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier." Describing what it's like to be governor of Texas. - George W. Bush, 7/98</blockquote>

He's been a bit more circumspect in his statements on this issue since 2001, but his actions, and those of members of his administration, speak volumes.