Swastika flag raised at NYU building

[EvilCat Breath]

Oh, okay. You want them to submit to your ministry of culture.

The quote you agreed with was “Muslims have no place in America”. That means you don’t care if they’re rapists or criminals. You want them to convert or die.

Yes. Absolutely. Because it is not the individual muslim that is the problem, it is ISLAM. The people who are committing these crimes are doing so in the name of their religion. They are being pious! They are true believers. The religion mandates killing jews, raping uncovered women, have sex with 9-year-old girls. "The Prophet Did It." They don't have to convert, just stop being pious believers. Perhaps Islam needs a reformation. There are some muslims who do believe that islam can be reformed. Dr. Oz is one. Above all, there is no First Amendment right to practice their religion by attacking others, no matter how firmly they believe it. There is no religious right to close down a liquor store because the quran finds liquor haram.

 

[Lisa558]

Oh, okay. You want them to submit to your ministry of culture.

The quote you agreed with was “Muslims have no place in America”. That means you don’t care if they’re rapists or criminals. You want them to convert or die.

So when someone says “Muslims have no place in America,” you get inflamed and somehow interpret that to say the speaker means they need to convert or die.

But when leftists chant “Death to Jews!!” (no need to interpret that - pretty explicit), you defend it as “free speech” and object that Jews (and decent non-Jews) want to quell that speech.

So which is it? Are people prohibited from expressing that Islamists are not compatible with Western culture, but screams to genocide the Jews should be allowed because it’s free speech?

More double standards.

 

[Marener]

So when someone says “Muslims have no place in America,” you get inflamed and somehow interpret that to say the speaker means they need to convert or die.

Do you think it’s okay for a Republican member of congress to say that Muslims have no place in America?

But when leftists chant “Death to Jews!!” (no need to interpret that - pretty explicit), you defend it as “free speech” and object that Jews (and decent non-Jews) want to quell that speech.

What do you want to do to people who say that? Lock them up? You’re on record wanting to jail people who use free speech in a way you don’t like so this would be on brand for you.

So which is it? Are people prohibited from expressing that Islamists are not compatible with Western culture, but screams to genocide the Jews should be allowed because it’s free speech?

More double standards.

You’re not being very precise here.

If a member of Congress is saying things like “Jews have no place in America”, you could be sure there would be massive uproar and almost certainly censure. That’s your double standard.

The constitution decides what’s allowed. It seems you forget that.

 

[drudge X]

So when someone says “Muslims have no place in America,” you get inflamed and somehow interpret that to say the speaker means they need to convert or die.

But when leftists chant “Death to Jews!!” (no need to interpret that - pretty explicit), you defend it as “free speech” and object that Jews (and decent non-Jews) want to quell that speech.

So which is it? Are people prohibited from expressing that Islamists are not compatible with Western culture, but screams to genocide the Jews should be allowed because it’s free speech?

More double standards.

Isn’t that something?

Gas the Jews, that’s free speech.
Saying Muslims convert or die, that’s hate speech.

 

[Marener]

Yes. Absolutely. Because it is not the individual muslim that is the problem, it is ISLAM. The people who are committing these crimes are doing so in the name of their religion. They are being pious! They are true believers. The religion mandates killing jews, raping uncovered women, have sex with 9-year-old girls. "The Prophet Did It." They don't have to convert, just stop being pious believers. Perhaps Islam needs a reformation. There are some muslims who do believe that islam can be reformed. Dr. Oz is one. Above all, there is no First Amendment right to practice their religion by attacking others, no matter how firmly they believe it. There is no religious right to close down a liquor store because the quran finds liquor haram.

So Muslims do have a place in America after all.

 

[Lisa558]

Do you think it’s okay for a Republican member of congress to say that Muslims have no place in America?

What do you want to do to people who say that? Lock them up? You’re on record wanting to jail people who use free speech in a way you don’t like so this would be on brand for you.

You’re not being very precise here.

If a member of Congress is saying things like “Jews have no place in America”, you could be sure there would be massive uproar and almost certainly censure. That’s your double standard.

The constitution decides what’s allowed. It seems you forget that.

I’m just pointing out your double standards when it comes to antisemitism: you are inflamed that someone says Muslims have no place in America, but defend antisemites’ right to shriek “Death to Jews!” as free speech.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Muslims have no place in America because their culture is incompatible with Western civilization. Since they are here, they submit to our laws, or suffer consequences which might well include an objecting female exercising her right of self-defense.

It is embarrassing to have to explain this to you. Are you all foreigners? Not educated in government or our legal framework? Or, just democrats.

He knows one thing about Islam and one thing only.

He has to defend it.

 

[Lisa558]

Isn’t that something?

Gas the Jews, that’s free speech.
Saying Muslims convert or die, that’s hate speech.

And Moroner pretends not to get it, and deflects.

 

[Marener]

Isn’t that something?

Gas the Jews, that’s free speech.
Saying Muslims convert or die, that’s hate speech.

The thing you guys refuse to understand is that hate speech is free speech.

So it’s both.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

And Moroner pretends not to get it, and deflects.

I don't think he pretends.

His ability to understand is just severely limited.

 

[Marener]

I’m just pointing out your double standards when it comes to antisemitism: you are inflamed that someone says Muslims have no place in America, but defend antisemites’ right to shriek “Death to Jews!” as free speech.

Why don’t you defend the right to free speech?

 

[Lisa558]

The thing you guys refuse to understand is that hate speech is free speech.

So it’s both.

And what (some) people are saying about Muslims is nowhere near as bad as what some say about Jews, but your rage is directed as the milder comment about Muslims and your excuse-making comes in when calls to genocide Jews are made.

 

[Lisa558]

Why don’t you defend the right to free speech?

Why don’t YOU? You are enraged that someone said Muslims have no place in America. Why not defend that instead? It’s free speech.

Where I draw the line is when people call to murder an entire group of people. But if the call to murder is targeted at Jews, then all of a sudden you’re for free speech.

Are you really so dense that you don’t see your own contradiction?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

He knows one thing about Islam and one thing only.

He has to defend it.

Perhaps democrats really do agree with islamic beliefs. An Imam in Britian said that muslim men have a right to rape uncovered women “So what is wrong in it? Who will object to that?” .

Briton backs imam in ‘uncovered meat’ row

ONE of Britain’s most senior Muslims has defended as “a great scholar” the Australian imam who likened scantily clad women to uncovered meat that draws predators. Abduljalil Sajid, a senior

www.thetimes.com

Is SAYING that there is a right to rape uncovered women protected by freedom of speech? Or, is actually raping women protected by freedom of religion>

 

[Marener]

And what (some) people are saying about Muslims is nowhere near as bad as what some say about Jews, but your rage is directed as the milder comment about Muslims and your excuse-making comes in when calls to genocide Jews are made.

You don’t get to say something bad because someone else said something worse.

That’s how children think.

If a democratic member of Congress said “Jews have no place in America”, you wouldn’t have the “it’s not that bad” attitude.

 

[Kruska]

Why don’t YOU? You are enraged that someone said Muslims have no place in America. Why not defend that instead? It’s free speech.

Where I draw the line is when people call to murder an entire group of people. But if the call to murder is targeted at Jews, then all of a sudden you’re for free speech.

Are you really so dense that you don’t see your own contradiction?

So only YOU and your mental brethren decide what people can say and not - great! Hitler shared your thoughts fully.

Marener already told you dummies:

The thing you guys refuse to understand is that hate speech is free speech. So it’s both.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You would murder people over their religion?

No Muslims do that.

 

[Lisa558]

You don’t get to say something bad because someone else said something worse.

That’s how children think.

If a democratic member of Congress said “Jews have no place in America”, you wouldn’t have the “it’s not that bad” attitude.

You avoided the point: your double standards in defending free speech depending upon whom the hate is directed to.

 

[Marener]

Why don’t YOU? You are enraged that someone said Muslims have no place in America. Why not defend that instead? It’s free speech.

Where haven’t

I’ll defend his right to say it. I’m not calling for him to be imprisoned or anything.

But he should be censured. The first amendment doesn’t protect you from Congressional censure.

Where I draw the line is when people call to murder an entire group of people. But if the call to murder is targeted at Jews, then all of a sudden you’re for free speech.

Are you really so dense that you don’t see your own contradiction?

I’m not “all of a sudden” for free speech. I’m always for free speech.

The constitution decides what is free speech, not you, and it has an extremely high bar about what is permissible. Your idea of what is free speech depends very much on the subject of that speech. Trump threatened to end the Iranian civilization, but none of you cared.

 

[Marener]

You avoided the point: your double standards in defending free speech depending upon whom the hate is directed to.

No double standard. As I said before, both are hate speech and both are free speech.

You just love to ignore anything I say that doesn’t fit your narrative, because ultimately you’re not very honest.