No, Muslims Should NOT Be Allowed To Serve In Public Office

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Enough to grant strong political and existential power to the psycopaths. Which the Klan very much enjoyed. Which the taliban very much enjoys.

Now define "strong political and existential power."

Hmm, no, i am not here to perform your exercises.....

= just talking shit, as has been obvious all along. Like most liberals you think "everybody knows!" is a rational proof.

And yet you don't seem to be able to do anything but whine...no rebuttal, no factual information, not even an attempt at an argument. Either i have magical powers of persuasion over you, or you're just a whiner holding an empty bag.

"Factual information" you say? Ok, where are your stats proving exactly how many American Christians supported the KKK in 1920 and exactly what influence the group had over American politics at that time? Next, provide a comparative study of influence and political action today. Finally, provide a comparative overlay of both regarding Islam then and now in at least half a dozen countries.

Get to work.

Stupid request. I would not need to know the exact percentage to show the far greater existential and political power they wielded in 1920 versus today. Or, the support from the local congregations and the arguments for white supremacy from christianity made publicly by their supporters and by them. What a stupid, trolling attempt.

The really funny thing about your tantrum is that you actually agree with me. You know as well as I do that they enjoyed very much christian support. Had they not, they would not have acheived such power. And, now they dont enjoy that level of support. These are simple facts. No go ahead, whine about me calling them facts, while also believing them. That embarrassing dog and pony show suits you well.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Do us a favor and update the main post with the main points of the discussion. I'm not going to wade through hundreds of vapid replies from a fringe radical. Be honest about it too, dont cherry pick only the stuff that supports your perspective.

NO, I'm not going to do your work for you., You come in here late, contribute almost nothing and then expect people who have hundreds of posts in this thread, to go to work for you ?

You have a search box, and the search this thread box makes it easier still. Use it. The law is US Constitution Article 6, Section 2, part 1, the Supremacy Clause. and the founding fathers who wrote it were not "fringe radicals". You have a lot to learn.

The Supremacy Clause is all over this thread. Stop being so lazy.

So where is the supremacy clause in the Koran? I have yet to see you quote where it conflicts with the Constitution.

Might not be spelled out directly, but could easily have text that is interpreted by it's followers in that way wouldn't you agree ??

Islam is not a law.

 

[Unkotare]

Now define "strong political and existential power."

Hmm, no, i am not here to perform your exercises.....

= just talking shit, as has been obvious all along. Like most liberals you think "everybody knows!" is a rational proof.

And yet you don't seem to be able to do anything but whine...no rebuttal, no factual information, not even an attempt at an argument. Either i have magical powers of persuasion over you, or you're just a whiner holding an empty bag.

"Factual information" you say? Ok, where are your stats proving exactly how many American Christians supported the KKK in 1920 and exactly what influence the group had over American politics at that time? Next, provide a comparative study of influence and political action today. Finally, provide a comparative overlay of both regarding Islam then and now in at least half a dozen countries.

Get to work.

Stupid request. .....

You either have the data to support your claim, or you don't.

 

[playtime]

the drawing board - dear fellow *... had the CONSTITUTION written all over it. you don't seem to comprehend exactly what that contains within it. & i don't need to read the thread....or anything that is within it... dearest of fellows * because you ARE clearly fucked in the head *.

* poster who is fucked in the head.

YES YOU DO need to read the thread and the Constitution. I'll do you a favor. Here's your drawing board. This is what you need to read >>

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
(Article 6, Section 2, the Supremacy Clause)

...which outlaws all other supremacisms (doesn't mention an exception for Islam)
Get it ?

sharia law ain't comin' to 'merica, jehro.

get that.

 

[playtime]

just another poorly educated basket dwelling deplorable............

But you don't have to wear that label any more, now. I just educated you in the previous post. You're welcome.

lol... yaaaaaaaa............ that's the ticket.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You're right, a doctor is needed. But it is for you.

Yes, there have been radical Muslims committing crimes.

The terrorist/criminals were all either apprehended or died. How many were there? 20? 25? Lets go crazy and say 50. There are rough 3.45 million Muslims in the US, and you want to deny them all the ability to hold public office. So punish all for what 0.001% actually did? That is just sad.

The overwhelming majority of Muslim abide by our laws. They follow our Constitution. And just because of their religion, you want them banned from public office. It has already been shown that the supremacy clause is not violated, since they do not act on the violent commands of the Quran.

Since the supremacy clause is not an issue, Article 6 applies and no religious test can be applied.

Once again, you lose. Just like your plan for the federal gov't to take over MLB.

OBVIOUSLY YOU LOSE.

1. Numbers don't mean much when it comes to Muslim terrorism. 19 guys killed 3000 on 9/11. ONE guy killed 13 at Fort hood. ONE killed 49 in the Pulse Club. And if the nutters were to het a hold of a nuke, just a few of them could kill millions.

2. I don't want anybody banned because of any religion. Islam is not a religion. See post # 75, Mr late arrival.

3. It's not so much that I want Muslims banned from public office, as it is the the Constitution Article 6 Section 2 require they be banned from everything. It bans Islam entirely, as well as any other supremacism. You've seen the Section. Stop talking nonsense.

4. The supremacy clause is not an issue ? The supremacy clause is THE ISSUE.

5. It is obvious that you are not well versed on how much Muslims act or don't act on the Koran. Or much of anything else about Islam in America. Are you familiar with all the Muslim Brotherhood groups in America ? They ALL act on the Koran.

CAIR, ISNA, MAS, MSA, ICNA, FCNA, MAYA, AEF, UASR, IAP, BMI, IIIT, IMANA, AMSE, ICNA, Islamic Institute, AMC, AMF, Success Foundation, GSISS AKA Cordoba University, NAIF, IIFTIKHAR, AMSS, TIAA, IRO, African Muslim Agency, Safa Trust, SAAR Foundation, MMCT, Dar El-Eiman USA, ADAMS, IANA, GRF, MWL, MYNA, HHT, Islamic Academy of Florida, Fairfax Institute, AMT, IIFSO, AMCE, AMAFVAC, CISNA, Isalmic Media Foundation, et al

They ALL are supremacist. None has ever disavowed the Explanatory Memorandum, despite having been called on it numerous times. There is every reason to believe they follow it 100%. No reason to think they don't.

6. You're still yammering about religion. This subject is not your forte. Maybe you could go back to talking about motorcycles, where you won't be a rib steak for Muslim jihadists. If you want to know how little you know about this, go ahead and take my Isamization Quiz.

7. You've only spoken about laws and terrorism, there's also the subject of Islamization, which you've said nothing about (if you even know what the word means - I've studied it for 18 years)

Your constant references to Post #75 is fucking joke!

One thing that isn't a joke, and that is that American's have been killed on American soil at the hands of what this nation is painfully debating (because Americans want to be an open peaceful society), and this in concerning who exactly has attacked and killed these American's in these specific attacks. It is a situation that if the facts keep pointing in a specific direction, then what conclusions can be drawn from it ?? The sad thing today with the leftist agenda, is that it is just headcounting for potential power to come from every human being that might somehow, someday be included, and therefore in this inclusion it might overwhelm the numbers of another political party someday. Stacking the deck is the agenda, because the numbers otherwise isn't there for them. They know it, and that is why we are seeing all that we are seeing in it all.

Blah -blah-blah-blah-blah. I reread that post at least three times and I still have no fucking idea what you are trying to say. You type lots of letters that don't connect.

 

[playtime]

^ My medical care comes from the VA (all free)

SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By that definition, firefighters are socialism. Police are socialism. Mail carriers are socialism. And you are in the twilight zone.

that's right... they are. nobody hasta pay outside of taxes for universal coverage. ain't that a hoot!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Stacking the deck is the agenda, because the numbers otherwise isn't there for them.

Of course, that is absurd and either a deep delusion or a shameless lie. All polling shows most americans support the basic ideas of the dem platform. The dems won more votes in the 2016 election and 8 million more votes in the 2018 election. Literally every single known fact stands in opposition to your false statement.

Who is your president now ? Matters not by what way it happened, and this in concerns of the system we have in place, but that the system by way of inclusion of all people's in all states brought about the Trump presidency. Something the left hates now.

You cannot possibly have typed that with a straight face. Trumps entire game is exclusion. Get that horseshit out of here.

So you hate the electorial college ??

The what?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hmm, no, i am not here to perform your exercises.....

= just talking shit, as has been obvious all along. Like most liberals you think "everybody knows!" is a rational proof.

And yet you don't seem to be able to do anything but whine...no rebuttal, no factual information, not even an attempt at an argument. Either i have magical powers of persuasion over you, or you're just a whiner holding an empty bag.

"Factual information" you say? Ok, where are your stats proving exactly how many American Christians supported the KKK in 1920 and exactly what influence the group had over American politics at that time? Next, provide a comparative study of influence and political action today. Finally, provide a comparative overlay of both regarding Islam then and now in at least half a dozen countries.

Get to work.

Stupid request. .....

You either have the data to support your claim, or you don't.

That data is not required to support the claim. As i just spelled out for you. You know, the claim you actually agree with 100%.

 

[Unkotare]

= just talking shit, as has been obvious all along. Like most liberals you think "everybody knows!" is a rational proof.

And yet you don't seem to be able to do anything but whine...no rebuttal, no factual information, not even an attempt at an argument. Either i have magical powers of persuasion over you, or you're just a whiner holding an empty bag.

"Factual information" you say? Ok, where are your stats proving exactly how many American Christians supported the KKK in 1920 and exactly what influence the group had over American politics at that time? Next, provide a comparative study of influence and political action today. Finally, provide a comparative overlay of both regarding Islam then and now in at least half a dozen countries.

Get to work.

Stupid request. .....

You either have the data to support your claim, or you don't.

That data is not required to support the claim. ....

Of course it is. You don't expect people to just take your word for it, do you?

 

[ph3iron]

Tough shit for you, huh

Not really....good, real legitimate Americans are privy to a preview of what happens when ragheads work in American government.
It’s actually awesome.

rag heads?
Quit cheating on our Brits description of Asians (too dumb to know that?)
I hate these brown Muslims who invented algebra the iPhone are better educated and pay more taxes than an old white fart like me.
Don't you wish for lynchings and MAGA?
My WV buds are with me

 

[Lastamender]

FactCheck,org says you are lying.

Trump, Carson on 9/11 'Celebrations' - FactCheck.org

{...
The Post story said that Jersey City police detained “a number of people” who were “allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding a tailgate-style party” in Jersey City. That allegation was unattributed and unverified. Even if it did happen, and there is no evidence of it, the celebrating was not on TV and did not involve “thousands and thousands of people.”

The Washington Post Fact Checker talked to both reporters on the Post story cited by Trump, and neither could recall if the allegations about the tailgate-style celebration were verified. “I specifically visited the Jersey City building and neighborhood where the celebrations were purported to have happened,” said Fredrick Kunkle, one of the Post reporters on that story. “But I could never verify that report.”

What’s clear to us — and should be to Trump — is that there were no widespread televised celebrations in New Jersey on 9/11. In fact, what Trump described would have been big news, and the reporters at the Daily News, Star-Ledger and elsewhere who tried and failed to track down rumors of 9/11 celebrations could have just turned on the TV to get their story.
...
Unlike Trump, Carson at least now acknowledges that it’s not true that thousands of Muslims were captured on TV celebrating in New Jersey on 9/11. But in doing so he rewrites the record.
...}

Factcheck ? ha ha ha. Verifications of Muslims celebrating after 9/11 were numerous. Maybe you watch CNN. They probably refer to FactCheck.

Not a single reputable source was able to find any evidence that anyone celebrated the 9/11 attack.
There are lots of fake claims, but they all fail to pan out when checked.

Not a single reputable source

I don't have that problem the Koran and Hadith are my sources. It certainly could have happened according to what I have read in those sources.

The Quran and Hadiths do not contain what you claim.
They are terse translations so easily misunderstood if taken out of context.
But once the surrounding context is supplied, it is clear Islam is totally nonviolent and does not promote anything remotely illegal.

The Quran and Hadiths do not contain what you claim.

The Hell they don't, the verses have been posted. There is no way to deny it but lying is what you do, and constantly.

 

[beagle9]

Now define "strong political and existential power."

Hmm, no, i am not here to perform your exercises.....

= just talking shit, as has been obvious all along. Like most liberals you think "everybody knows!" is a rational proof.

And yet you don't seem to be able to do anything but whine...no rebuttal, no factual information, not even an attempt at an argument. Either i have magical powers of persuasion over you, or you're just a whiner holding an empty bag.

"Factual information" you say? Ok, where are your stats proving exactly how many American Christians supported the KKK in 1920 and exactly what influence the group had over American politics at that time? Next, provide a comparative study of influence and political action today. Finally, provide a comparative overlay of both regarding Islam then and now in at least half a dozen countries.

Get to work.

Stupid request. I would not need to know the exact percentage to show the far greater existential and political power they wielded in 1920 versus today. Or, the support from the local congregations and the arguments for white supremacy from christianity made publicly by their supporters and by them. What a stupid, trolling attempt.

The really funny thing about your tantrum is that you actually agree with me. You know as well as I do that they enjoyed very much christian support. Had they not, they would not have acheived such power. And, now they dont enjoy that level of support. These are simple facts. No go ahead, whine about me calling them facts, while also believing them. That embarrassing dog and pony show suits you well.

Well the Christian's are still here, yet you say that now they (the KKK), don't enjoy that alledged level of support these days ? What changed with the Christian's ?? Kind of goes against your attempt to lump the Christian's in with the KKK doesn't it ??

 

[beagle9]

Stacking the deck is the agenda, because the numbers otherwise isn't there for them.

Of course, that is absurd and either a deep delusion or a shameless lie. All polling shows most americans support the basic ideas of the dem platform. The dems won more votes in the 2016 election and 8 million more votes in the 2018 election. Literally every single known fact stands in opposition to your false statement.

Who is your president now ? Matters not by what way it happened, and this in concerns of the system we have in place, but that the system by way of inclusion of all people's in all states brought about the Trump presidency. Something the left hates now.

You cannot possibly have typed that with a straight face. Trumps entire game is exclusion. Get that horseshit out of here.

So you hate the electorial college ??

The what?

Electoral. Ok.... LOL

 

[protectionist]

sharia law ain't comin' to 'merica, jehro.

get that.

It's already BEEN here uniformed one.

 

[beagle9]

sharia law ain't comin' to 'merica, jehro.

get that.

It's already BEEN here uniformed one.

Yep, many communities practice their own laws and traditions, and they just call the city/state/law enforcement when they need an added intervention. Also there is that little thing called no go zones now. These are dangerous area's that gangs control, drug runners/king pins run or the police don't want to go into for fear of being set up. Religious lines also gain respect among government to which it doesn't intervene in traditional practices that don't violate state or federal laws. Then we have reservation justice, and their laws where as the Indian tribes in a bid to stay free and independent, chose their own way also.

 

[protectionist]

So you cherrypick the definition? Figures.

I provided a definition and link of "Religion" according to 2 sources. If your dictionary provides 4 entries, using only one (and not the main entry) is nonsense.

It's not nonsense. Don't you know how dictionaries work ? They don't contradict themselves. They just offer more than one definition. Any of them is definitive of the word. So let's get to it. Do you say that religions do not have codes of ethics ?

 

[protectionist]

It certainly does matter that the US recognizes it as a religion. And your personal definition of "Religion" is what does not matter. I am still asking for a credible, documentable definition of "Religion" that excludes Islam and covers other religions.

Article 6 states there can be no religious test. What other countries say about Islam is irrelevant.

It's not my " personal definition of "Religion" , it is a definition taken from a very authoritative dictionary, and you know it. I've posted the source twice.

NO, you're NOT "asking for a credible, documentable definition of "Religion" that excludes Islam and covers other religions.", because I've already given it to you twice. One that carries a code of ethics with a specific system of belief and worship. And for the 3rd time >> Webster's New World College Dictionary, 5th ed.

The USA's recognition of Islam as a religion is just wrong, and it doesn't matter if it does or not. Even if Islam was a religion, it would still be unconstitutional by virtue of its supremacism, in violation of the Constitution (article 6, Section 2, part 1), as well as its advocacy of things that violate US laws.

 

[protectionist]

The fact that 40 million women are abused by their spouses and significant others shows that a huge number of people are not compatible with US law. But US law does not look at groups. It looks at the individual. Unless the individual has committed domestic abuse, they are allowed for run for and hold office.

The fact that most Muslims do not beat their wives shows the supremacy clause to be irrelevant to their serving in public office.

WHERE/HOW do you come up with the extraordinary claim that "most Muslims do not beat their wives". You have absolutely no basis upon which to make such a preposterous (and probably wrong) statement.

I've seen you post some pretty wild things WB, but this one might take the cake.

The fact that the Koran contains a verse (4:34) that commands Muslim husbands to beat their wives, shows (among many other things) that Muslims are unfit to serve in pubic office, by belonging to a creed that is criminal.

 

[protectionist]

Of course, that is absurd and either a deep delusion or a shameless lie. All polling shows most americans support the basic ideas of the dem platform. The dems won more votes in the 2016 election and 8 million more votes in the 2018 election. Literally every single known fact stands in opposition to your false statement.

HA HA HA. It's funny to see the grotesque ramifications of watching leftist media (CNN/MSNBC/PBS/etc).

EARTH TO FFI:

1. Polling is a Democrat thing. It invariably shows things that are favorable to Democrats, because it is primarily only Democrats who answer polls. This is why pools are a non-credible laughingstock, just like the ones that predicted Hillary Clinton to be elected POTUS. You haven't realized this by now. Oh, you watch CNN, huh ?

2. Democrats did NOT win more votes in the 2016 election FROM AMERICANS. They might have won more, with millions of illegal alien votes counted in.