Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
As for "love your enemies" commandments in the Koran, there are plenty.
Well I followed your link and "plenty" is a bit of an exaggeration.
There are one or two BUT there are many that say the opposite.
And Islamic commentators on your own link specifically disowned the idea of "turning the other cheek".
SO it comes down to how contradictions are handled:
In both religions there are contradictions between texts.
In both religions these are conventionally resolved by giving priority to later verses.
The texts you quote are early ones (remember the Kpran is not arranged chronologically).
Unfortunately the later ones are generally much less friendly and are conventionally regarded as cancelling the early ones, at least when muslims are in a position of power.
Seriously, where are you even getting your ideas?
Studying the primary sources and early history (7th and 8th centuries).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
And? The Christian Bible has plenty of similar quotes.
But that is the old testament and Christ (and many later commentators such as St Isaac the Syrian have expressly overruled any interpretation that suggests violence).
The Koran however (unlike the Bible) is supposed to be the definitive word of God precisely dictated.
You won't find such a quote in the New Testament and you will plenty that contradicts it (even in Exodus it says "vex not the Stranger that is in your midst.)
Now go away and find a commandment to "love your enemies" in the Koran.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
Do you really want to get into a pissing match over who's religion is worse.
It isn't about that - it is about which religion poses a threat to our values (ironically the very values that I suspect you think you are trying to promote.)
Now we could argue the toss about the historical record of violence etc but that isn't the point here.
Alternatively we could argue about the theoretical doctrines as laid down in the texts.
Or we could argue about the moral record of the religion's founder.
However neither of these is the point.
The real problem is the organisational structure of the faith.
Now consider this: Only a few territories have ever been de-islamized and many territories once under muslim control have had the minority (orignally majority) populations cleansed out slowly - often over centuries.
Of course the few places where islam has been forced to retreat have always required extreme brutality (the Reconquista and the Balkans spring to mind).
In contrast Christianity has faded away without a fight in europe - and for that matter in many places/social groups in the US.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
It's as much a religion as anything else that calls itself a religion
So you subscribe to the theory that "everything that calls itself a religion is a religion."
In which case any cult that calls itself a religion is accorded the constitutional privilege no matter how barbaric.
*(From Wikipedia) according to Lance deHaven-Smith of Florida State University, based on "the definitive study of the uncounted ballots" (the Florida Ballot Project by NORC at the University of Chicago), if all the legally valid votes in Florida had been counted statewide, Al Gore would have been the winner, a conclusion deHaven-Smith calls "unambiguous and unavoidable."[4]
Most of the rest of the Presidents can claim victory in both Electoral College and the popular vote.
However George W Bush didn't win either in the popular vote OR in the electoral college*
He only won in court.
Trump did at least win in the electoral college and since that is the way the rules are set it is the only thing that matters.
If the rules had been "popular vote wins" it is far from certain that Trump would not hve won - because campaigning strategies etc would all have been different.
Use of a contactless credit card needs to more deliberate, for obvious reasons.
Don 't know what you are talking about I found it works just fine on the London tube.
Why not install machines that automate the selling of tokens to open barriers and allow access to the trains, you know like a scannable ticket. Or is the real intent here to be able to track peoples movements?
Of course, as you know, we already have these.
However the use of direct contactless payment via bank cards has proved to be a big cost saver and is very convenient for most people.
What this is is the tendency of technologically interested but clueless public officialdom to try and follow the latest trends as pushed by the vendors of new technology.
A bigger problem is the current US government is driving the country towards fascism. They are following the standard playbook:
I'd not call it fascism - I'd call it McCarthyism. The US has a history of it.
In the most modern context "Erdoganism". (Since he has done pretty much all of the above.
Which can be identified as a form of Islamism (as Erdogan's party is historically an Islamic party and has reinforced Islam within Turkey).
Then again Erdogan himself said that there is no such thing as Islamism - only Islam. So there we are folks - full circle - you become the very thing you set out to oppose!
Maybe Trump should ban himself from entering the US.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
It is pretty clear that Islam was not a factor in the minds of the framers when they wrote that. They were thinking about (at most) various fairly conventional varieties of Protestant Christian.
In fact it is pretty clear that the constitution didn't block the persecution of Mormons in the mid 1800s - otherwise the would not have all migrated to Utah.
It does also beg the question of "what is a religion?"
Are we required to accept that something is a religion just because it says it is. What about the church of the flying spaghetti monster?
More pointedly, had communism declared itself to be a religion then would (or should) anti-communism have been a possibility. (Of course the anti-"communist" purges are a blot on America's history).
What about Charles Manson's "family" and all the other cults?
Just how bad or dangerous does something have to be before we strip this protection from it?
And should it matter if the cult in question has a large following outside the US and has wealthy backers?
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
A specific source of information is here
http://www.exmna.org/
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
As for "love your enemies" commandments in the Koran, there are plenty.
Well I followed your link and "plenty" is a bit of an exaggeration.
There are one or two BUT there are many that say the opposite.
And Islamic commentators on your own link specifically disowned the idea of "turning the other cheek".
SO it comes down to how contradictions are handled:
In both religions there are contradictions between texts.
In both religions these are conventionally resolved by giving priority to later verses.
The texts you quote are early ones (remember the Kpran is not arranged chronologically).
Unfortunately the later ones are generally much less friendly and are conventionally regarded as cancelling the early ones, at least when muslims are in a position of power.
Seriously, where are you even getting your ideas?
Studying the primary sources and early history (7th and 8th centuries).
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: cheap bastards
Somehow, it's comical that you're still saying it. How bigly does he have to fuck up before you tards admit you were conned?
Thanks for that line do you mindif Iuse it against the brexiteers?
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
And? The Christian Bible has plenty of similar quotes.
But that is the old testament and Christ (and many later commentators such as St Isaac the Syrian have expressly overruled any interpretation that suggests violence).
The Koran however (unlike the Bible) is supposed to be the definitive word of God precisely dictated.
You won't find such a quote in the New Testament and you will plenty that contradicts it (even in Exodus it says "vex not the Stranger that is in your midst.)
Now go away and find a commandment to "love your enemies" in the Koran.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
Do you really want to get into a pissing match over who's religion is worse.
It isn't about that - it is about which religion poses a threat to our values (ironically the very values that I suspect you think you are trying to promote.)
Now we could argue the toss about the historical record of violence etc but that isn't the point here.
Alternatively we could argue about the theoretical doctrines as laid down in the texts.
Or we could argue about the moral record of the religion's founder.
However neither of these is the point.
The real problem is the organisational structure of the faith.
Have a read of this short story to get the idea:
https://freeclassicshortstories.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/the-snowball-effect-by-katherine-maclea n.html
Now compare the early expansion of Islam and the way it has held on to almost all of its conquests.
The real problem is the rules of the faith which form a kind of ratchet that keeps people and territories on board.
To see the problems faced by those who want to leave have a look at this woman's experiences: https://areomagazine.com/2016/12/19/sarah-haider-on-leaving-islam-changing-liberals-min ds-and-ex-muslims-of-north-america/
Now consider this: Only a few territories have ever been de-islamized and many territories once under muslim control have had the minority (orignally majority) populations cleansed out slowly - often over centuries.
This woman's point of view gives some information on that: https://medium.com/@najwa.najib/donald-trump-is-good-for-middle-eastern-christians-350f049bed6 2#.quv1fzf55
Of course the few places where islam has been forced to retreat have always required extreme brutality (the Reconquista and the Balkans spring to mind).
In contrast Christianity has faded away without a fight in europe - and for that matter in many places/social groups in the US.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
When that is said, you should be able to point out why Islam isn't a religion based on your assertions.
I can't really do that unless you first set the criteria for what is a religion.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
As much as several modern terrorists have islam as a religion, very few of them seems to understand what islam is.
What do you think it is?
and can you back that up from primary sources?
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
It's as much a religion as anything else that calls itself a religion So you subscribe to the theory that "everything that calls itself a religion is a religion."
In which case any cult that calls itself a religion is accorded the constitutional privilege no matter how barbaric.
Or is there some other criterion?
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
That'd be like the Bible or Quran preaching "Love thy neighbour (except if your neighbour isn't from your village)".
"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves."
Koran 48:29
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Most of the rest of the Presidents can claim victory in both Electoral College and the popular vote.
However George W Bush didn't win either in the popular vote OR in the electoral college*
He only won in court.
Trump did at least win in the electoral college and since that is the way the rules are set it is the only thing that matters.
If the rules had been "popular vote wins" it is far from certain that Trump would not hve won - because campaigning strategies etc would all have been different.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
Islam would be classed a religion. because it is.
Exactly why do you think it is a religion?
On the post: UK Train Operators Plan To Charge Passengers Using Their Biometrics
Re: Re: Re:
Use of a contactless credit card needs to more deliberate, for obvious reasons. Don 't know what you are talking about I found it works just fine on the London tube.
On the post: UK Train Operators Plan To Charge Passengers Using Their Biometrics
Re:
Why not install machines that automate the selling of tokens to open barriers and allow access to the trains, you know like a scannable ticket. Or is the real intent here to be able to track peoples movements?
Of course, as you know, we already have these.
However the use of direct contactless payment via bank cards has proved to be a big cost saver and is very convenient for most people.
What this is is the tendency of technologically interested but clueless public officialdom to try and follow the latest trends as pushed by the vendors of new technology.
It is not really sinister - just stupid!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: The System Works for Now
A bigger problem is the current US government is driving the country towards fascism. They are following the standard playbook:
I'd not call it fascism - I'd call it McCarthyism. The US has a history of it.
In the most modern context "Erdoganism". (Since he has done pretty much all of the above.
Which can be identified as a form of Islamism (as Erdogan's party is historically an Islamic party and has reinforced Islam within Turkey).
Then again Erdogan himself said that there is no such thing as Islamism - only Islam. So there we are folks - full circle - you become the very thing you set out to oppose!
Maybe Trump should ban himself from entering the US.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re:
here is a reason for that. Our President will let you know in 140 characters or less why that is.
But that doesn' tmean that you have to sink to his level in your response!
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Title 18 Capter 12 US Code 1182
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
It is pretty clear that Islam was not a factor in the minds of the framers when they wrote that. They were thinking about (at most) various fairly conventional varieties of Protestant Christian.
In fact it is pretty clear that the constitution didn't block the persecution of Mormons in the mid 1800s - otherwise the would not have all migrated to Utah.
It does also beg the question of "what is a religion?"
Are we required to accept that something is a religion just because it says it is. What about the church of the flying spaghetti monster?
More pointedly, had communism declared itself to be a religion then would (or should) anti-communism have been a possibility. (Of course the anti-"communist" purges are a blot on America's history).
What about Charles Manson's "family" and all the other cults?
Just how bad or dangerous does something have to be before we strip this protection from it?
And should it matter if the cult in question has a large following outside the US and has wealthy backers?
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
Why, if the Canadians and Mexicans want to pour across without limits, it's their right.
Why would they want to when Trump is President?
On the post: UK Train Operators Plan To Charge Passengers Using Their Biometrics
why not move on to facial recognition
why not move on to facial recognition
Guy Fawkes is going to get a big bill!
Next >>