Do Republicans believe a Muslim should be allowed to serve in public office if elected?

[DOTR]

So, your poster boy for Christian intolerance is a guy who managed to hold a seat in a State House for one term.


That's the worst/best example you can come up with?


That does not sound like a strong political force.

That's the worst/best example YOU can come up with? How the fuck does his having served one term mitigate his blatant and opprobrious bigotry. And, you might recall, that I documented the fact that there are many others like him, in and out of government. You might be familiar with Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann to name just a few.

The one term mitigated your implication that he was a representative of a strong and dangerous political movement.

The point -which I have proven -is that they are more of a threat to the endurance of secular government the Islam. If you are to blind to see that, or too dishonest to admit it, it's not my problem.

THe fact that the man you put forth as an example of what a threat they are, held his office for ONE term and that was out of government.


That does not prove that that movement is a threat. If anything it makes it look very weak.


TO discuss the threat of islam, we should look at nations that have allowed high levels of muslim immigration for a long time, to see what future issues we could have.

You are just trying to squirm out of admitting the reality of what I'm saying. Apparently you missed this: Christian Dominionism-The Real Threat to Our Secular Government

As far a looking at other countries, name one that has a tradition of secular government and an establish democracy where the Muslim population has been a threat to - or has undermined-their system of government

Name one Muslim democracy.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

History proves that it doesn't matter. Obama was elected twice.

Something to consider.....................
Who is More of a Threat: Far-Right or Muslim Extremists?

How far back do they go?

Common!! Pull you head out!

Don't know, or don't want to admit it?

I recall a number of these incidents from the last couple of years . If you want to know exact dates look them up. I'm not doing your homework for you. The fact is that in any given time frame, right wing terrorism has been more prevalent

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I don’t think Muslims should be elected to public office. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Thank you for admitting that you have no respect for the constitution and the traditions that Made America Great long before tRump

 

[DOTR]

I don’t think Muslims should be elected to public office. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Thank you for admitting that you have no respect for the constitution and the traditions that Made America Great long before tRump

My constitution says I select my candidates on any criteria I find relevant. Are you insane?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

That's the worst/best example YOU can come up with? How the fuck does his having served one term mitigate his blatant and opprobrious bigotry. And, you might recall, that I documented the fact that there are many others like him, in and out of government. You might be familiar with Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann to name just a few.

The one term mitigated your implication that he was a representative of a strong and dangerous political movement.

The point -which I have proven -is that they are more of a threat to the endurance of secular government the Islam. If you are to blind to see that, or too dishonest to admit it, it's not my problem.

THe fact that the man you put forth as an example of what a threat they are, held his office for ONE term and that was out of government.


That does not prove that that movement is a threat. If anything it makes it look very weak.


TO discuss the threat of islam, we should look at nations that have allowed high levels of muslim immigration for a long time, to see what future issues we could have.

You are just trying to squirm out of admitting the reality of what I'm saying. Apparently you missed this: Christian Dominionism-The Real Threat to Our Secular Government

As far a looking at other countries, name one that has a tradition of secular government and an establish democracy where the Muslim population has been a threat to - or has undermined-their system of government

Name one Muslim democracy.

It is a logical fallacy to suggest that because there are no Muslim majority countries that are democracies, that Muslims are a threat to existing democracies.

It is in fact a ...

Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All invalid arguments are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies.

It is also a red herring fallacy intended to divert attention away from the fact that you can't honestly refute my point

 

[deltex1]

like i said , sounds like yer bomber pilot friend was an APOSTATE muslim and other muslims finally dealt with him DTex .

He was a Shia...Saddam was Sunni. Same old shit. Sort out the human muzzies...kill the rest.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I don’t think Muslims should be elected to public office. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Thank you for admitting that you have no respect for the constitution and the traditions that Made America Great long before tRump

My constitution says I select my candidates on any criteria I find relevant. Are you insane?

Again you prove my point!! No respect for and/or ignorance of the Constitution

The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3. By its plain terms, no federal office holder or employee can be required to adhere to or accept any particular religion or doctrine as a prerequisite to holding a federal office or a federal government job.
No Religious Test Clause - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Religious_Test_Clause

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It did but you just don't know it. Too busy playing the victim.

The other races have been dealing with this shit for centuries and here you are crying like a bitch.

So, instead of explaining what in my post supported your race baiting assholeness, you simply posted some more race baiting assholeness.




My point stands, as you have been too much a pussy to even try to refute it.


When you vile lefties falsely accuse people of being racist, you are tearing this nation apart.


You are pissing off more and more whites all the time.

And the poor minorities who believe your shit, are told over and over again that their fellow citizens are their enemies and that they need to be ready to fight them.

You don't get it even when it's explained to you. Unification requires an effort at understanding. You are obviously so entrenched in your opinions that it will never be possible. You are always the victim of race baiters.

I stated that false accusation of racism were pissing off more and more whites.


YOur response was to strongly imply that I was racist. That was you being as ass.



That's pure division. Talking about whites as a group does not justify an accusation of racism.


Entrenched in my position?

You aren't even discussing my position. All you are doing it talking shit.

YOur response was to strongly imply that I was racist. That was you being as ass.

No, I suggested your own entrenched attitudes cause you to feel divided.

In your response you referred to non -whites as "lesser races".

In context, I assumed that you were implying that that was MY view.


If, at this point, you want claim that as YOUR OWN VIEW, then I will admit that I was wrong.


Otherwise, you did indeed call me a racist without cause, demonstrating yourself to be a race baiting piece of shit.

My intention in using that phrase was to force you into engagement so as to measure your responses. I've never asserted you were racist. I've explained repeatedly what I believe about your position. The fact that you are still focused on your own victimization is only more validation of my points. While my phrase was purposely inflammatory, you have never addressed the premise other than to accuse me of slighting you.

 

[Ava]

If a Muslim is elected to public office, do Republicans feel they should be allowed to server or should they be banned?

I don't think in terms of "should" and "shouldn't but Muslims can't be legally banned unless they are living in America illegally, then YES by all means, ban them. Same with any politician. One must be living here legally to serve. Would I like to see legal Muslims unable to serve? Yes, I would. They are proliferating faster than cockroaches. They and Hispanics will soon be the majority in this country and their radical and progressive agendas will soon be in place. I speak as a conservative, not a Republican but the following appears to be a true statement:

SNIP:

Politically, Republicans are less favorable to Islam than are Democrats; Republicans are more likely to say they are “very concerned” about the rise of Islamic extremism in the world and that “Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence among its believers.”

Muslim Population in U.S. to Double by 2050, Study Shows

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Issa, thank you for this post. It made me think about some issues in a different light. You are Muslim, correct?

Yes I'm....before I moved to the US, there was a general belief that red states are the most hostile to Muslims, and religious Americans are the least welcoming of other cultures and religions. I made sure I move to an ultra liberal city and state, cause Racism bigotry was never part of my life and I didn't wanna go through that. I have to say since 9/11 I was never discriminated against because of my religion, and i'm so thankful for that....But some friends who live in conservative cities/states weren't as fortunate.
I think is due to ignorance.....people who are less educated, didn't travel abroad, weren't exposed to other cultures do have tendencies to be afraid of the other.

Now do i think that people in those red states can be nice and genuine? Yes I do, but the brainwashing that goes on in the media and through their churches and party affiliation...It turns them against Muslims and make them paranoid about Islam.

So, you were pre-disposed to dislike conservatives before you even moved here.


Once here you are surrounded by people who are enemies of conservatives to keep feeding you the same.

So what part of we know who doesn't like us part you didn't understand?

Oh, I understand perfectly.

YOu look at people that disagree with you, or haven an political issue with you,

and you come to the conclusion there is something wrong with them.

^ More complaints of victimization.

 

[Harry Dresden]

columbian , peruvian , mexican , venezuelan , brazilian , arab muslim they are ALL the same third worlders Harry .

you keep on proving to me you have never been around those different from yourself.....you are a paranoid individual pismoe....get out more....

--------------------------------------------------------------- why would i want to be around diverse opinions when i already have MY opinions of my being correct Harry ??

because you aint correct,you only think you are because you only listen to people like yourself...

 

[Harry Dresden]

then you are being naive if you dont think a lot of democrats are wary of muslims too...oh sure they will tell you to your face they are with you,its when you are not there that the real feelings come out....

Of course....but conservatives are a lot worse , it's everywhere in the world the right is the least tolerant to other cultures and religions. That's why most minorities vote for the left although those very same minorities are in general conservative.

the far left is just as intolerant to other cultures and religions as the far right is...

Baseless Bovine Excrement.

the far left and right?....you bet they are....

How about the far moderates?

what is a far moderate?....never heard this term before....

 

[Sunni Man]

Name one Muslim democracy.

Egypt, Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Afghanistan, Iraq ....

 

[DOTR]

Name one Muslim democracy.

Egypt, Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Afghanistan, Iraq ....

Now how did I miss those paradises on Earth?

 

[Correll]

So, your poster boy for Christian intolerance is a guy who managed to hold a seat in a State House for one term.


That's the worst/best example you can come up with?


That does not sound like a strong political force.

That's the worst/best example YOU can come up with? How the fuck does his having served one term mitigate his blatant and opprobrious bigotry. And, you might recall, that I documented the fact that there are many others like him, in and out of government. You might be familiar with Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann to name just a few.

The one term mitigated your implication that he was a representative of a strong and dangerous political movement.

The point -which I have proven -is that they are more of a threat to the endurance of secular government the Islam. If you are to blind to see that, or too dishonest to admit it, it's not my problem.

THe fact that the man you put forth as an example of what a threat they are, held his office for ONE term and that was out of government.


That does not prove that that movement is a threat. If anything it makes it look very weak.


TO discuss the threat of islam, we should look at nations that have allowed high levels of muslim immigration for a long time, to see what future issues we could have.

You are just trying to squirm out of admitting the reality of what I'm saying. Apparently you missed this: Christian Dominionism-The Real Threat to Our Secular Government

http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...real-threat-to-our-secular-government.544498/


I note that you don't clarify what you are saying, you just say that I got it wrong. You don't respond to my point, and you post a link to another thread as an answer.


That's you being evasive. You lose.

As far a looking at other countries, name one that has a tradition of secular government and an establish democracy where the Muslim population has been a threat to - or has undermined-their system of government

Sure. Turkey.

 

[Correll]

History proves that it doesn't matter. Obama was elected twice.

Something to consider.....................
Who is More of a Threat: Far-Right or Muslim Extremists?

How far back do they go?

Common!! Pull you head out!

Don't know, or don't want to admit it?

I recall a number of these incidents from the last couple of years . If you want to know exact dates look them up. I'm not doing your homework for you. The fact is that in any given time frame, right wing terrorism has been more prevalent

YOu are avoiding the fact that the "Study" was designed to avoid the largest single terrorist attack in this nation's history.

 

[miketx]

If a Muslim is elected to public office, do Republicans feel they should be allowed to server or should they be banned?

Is jughead running again?

 

[DOTR]

I don’t think Muslims should be elected to public office. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Thank you for admitting that you have no respect for the constitution and the traditions that Made America Great long before tRump

My constitution says I select my candidates on any criteria I find relevant. Are you insane?

Again you prove my point!! No respect for and/or ignorance of the Constitution

The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3. By its plain terms, no federal office holder or employee can be required to adhere to or accept any particular religion or doctrine as a prerequisite to holding a federal office or a federal government job.
No Religious Test Clause - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Religious_Test_Clause

I wouldn’t require anyone to adhere to any religion. I just wouldn’t vote for a Muslim and don’t think anyone else should.
Explain again how the Constitution restricts my decision making process when I step into a voting booth.
You are the epitome of the decline of western civilization. You aren’t fit to participate because you can’t grasp free choice and your decision making skills have been ruined by night after night of sitting slack jawed in front of American Idol.

 

[Correll]

So, instead of explaining what in my post supported your race baiting assholeness, you simply posted some more race baiting assholeness.




My point stands, as you have been too much a pussy to even try to refute it.


When you vile lefties falsely accuse people of being racist, you are tearing this nation apart.


You are pissing off more and more whites all the time.

And the poor minorities who believe your shit, are told over and over again that their fellow citizens are their enemies and that they need to be ready to fight them.

You don't get it even when it's explained to you. Unification requires an effort at understanding. You are obviously so entrenched in your opinions that it will never be possible. You are always the victim of race baiters.

I stated that false accusation of racism were pissing off more and more whites.


YOur response was to strongly imply that I was racist. That was you being as ass.



That's pure division. Talking about whites as a group does not justify an accusation of racism.


Entrenched in my position?

You aren't even discussing my position. All you are doing it talking shit.

YOur response was to strongly imply that I was racist. That was you being as ass.

No, I suggested your own entrenched attitudes cause you to feel divided.

In your response you referred to non -whites as "lesser races".

In context, I assumed that you were implying that that was MY view.


If, at this point, you want claim that as YOUR OWN VIEW, then I will admit that I was wrong.


Otherwise, you did indeed call me a racist without cause, demonstrating yourself to be a race baiting piece of shit.

My intention in using that phrase was to force you into engagement so as to measure your responses. I've never asserted you were racist. I've explained repeatedly what I believe about your position. The fact that you are still focused on your own victimization is only more validation of my points. While my phrase was purposely inflammatory, you have never addressed the premise other than to accuse me of slighting you.

The concept that vile insults in a the course of an "Engagement" should be ignored is a fallacy.


What that creates is the opportunity for the dishonest liar to smear and marginalize good people by creating a false perception of them though the constant drumbeat of vile lies that are not challenged.


YOu want to engage on substance? THen stop with the vile lies, you race baiter.


SO, what was the point you wanted to engage on?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You don't get it even when it's explained to you. Unification requires an effort at understanding. You are obviously so entrenched in your opinions that it will never be possible. You are always the victim of race baiters.

I stated that false accusation of racism were pissing off more and more whites.


YOur response was to strongly imply that I was racist. That was you being as ass.



That's pure division. Talking about whites as a group does not justify an accusation of racism.


Entrenched in my position?

You aren't even discussing my position. All you are doing it talking shit.

YOur response was to strongly imply that I was racist. That was you being as ass.

No, I suggested your own entrenched attitudes cause you to feel divided.

In your response you referred to non -whites as "lesser races".

In context, I assumed that you were implying that that was MY view.


If, at this point, you want claim that as YOUR OWN VIEW, then I will admit that I was wrong.


Otherwise, you did indeed call me a racist without cause, demonstrating yourself to be a race baiting piece of shit.

My intention in using that phrase was to force you into engagement so as to measure your responses. I've never asserted you were racist. I've explained repeatedly what I believe about your position. The fact that you are still focused on your own victimization is only more validation of my points. While my phrase was purposely inflammatory, you have never addressed the premise other than to accuse me of slighting you.

The concept that vile insults in a the course of an "Engagement" should be ignored is a fallacy.


What that creates is the opportunity for the dishonest liar to smear and marginalize good people by creating a false perception of them though the constant drumbeat of vile lies that are not challenged.


YOu want to engage on substance? THen stop with the vile lies, you race baiter.


SO, what was the point you wanted to engage on?

What that creates is the opportunity for the dishonest liar to smear and marginalize good people by creating a false perception of them though the constant drumbeat of vile lies that are not challenged.

No. It gives you the opportunity to show why that isn't the case. You chose to and are still choosing to cry about being victimized.

You're asking what my point was because your perceptions are skewed to the point where you can't see anything except your own position.

My point was that other races have been dealing with the kind of anger and resentment for centuries that you expressed white people are feeling now. You claimed that it was only a matter of time until white folks respond. You chose that victim position over an issue that people from another race decided was an issue they needed to respond to.

So basically, you're feeling outraged and marginalized over over someone else who is speaking out because they're feeling outraged and marginalized.