jefferiah

Of course they should, if that is their choice. A student praying in school or a citizen praying on public property is not a violation of the seperation of church and state. They are not establishing a state religion by doing so. If the school itself were to mandate prayer then it would be a violation. But for an individual to pray of his own volition is not an example of a state religion.

Interesting you should say so. I could easily dig up some quotes of your own on par with Miss Bardot's but aimed at Americans. That'll be 15 grand Drea. Are you willing to part with that money to back up your principle?

Thats ridiculous Kuzadd. Someone calling you a name does not infringe upon your right to free speech. You've done the same.

Thats a poor example Kuzadd. You are using an example of people who do not agree with your free speech using their own free speech to criticize you. That is not a violation of anyone's right. It is simply more free speech. No one is being held legally liable in your examples. Bridgette Bardot is actually on trial for making a comment. Not once, but five times has the French justice system repeated this ridiculous farce. Now if you want to criticize Miss Bardot or diss her opinions and call her a traitor, that's an entirely different matter isn't it, than making her appear before a judge for her opinions and fining her 15 grand Euro.

Do you not think that is a higly unreasonable, even dangerous law? Freedom of speech and expression is the cornerstone of free societies. In case you missed it, I think thats why the poster made the topic. I believe it was you who said "Most Christians are willing to kill...."

So basically you value marijuana over freedom of speech. Well, as Dion says, making priorities is not easy. Maybe you could sell all your natural rights for a big bag of weed.

So what. I could care less who or what she hates. If she hates me or my family or whatever. You are missing the point here. Why is she being charged for it?

I don't think Williams was out of line. Watson dishes out crap everyday, he can't take a little? Seems to me the leftwingers think its only OK when they do it. They suddenly become victims when they are met with any response. Even Greenpeace kicked Mr. Watson out for being too violent and radical. "Terrorist" might not be far off the mark. Isn't he wanted for attempted murder in Costa Rica?

You know Drea, I always hear you saying this, but I have a hard time believing it. Actually, in observing your interactions with people on this forum, it would appear to me that mockery is something that naturally flows from your own person, and I see very little indication of you getting any in return. So I mean how does this mockery take place. I mean what exactly happens daily in your life that is so horrible. Are you walking down the street while people hurl rocks at you chanting "Fanatic Fanatic!!"?

I think you fail to understand what I was saying. An inadvertent death would not be an act of punishment, would it? And I said he "may" have put himself in that position. Death is not a suitable punishment for purse snatching, but reacting to a purse snatching is not over-the-top. She may not have intended to kill the boy, and I might have more sympathy for someone who caused an "inadvertent" death when the deceased just finished robbing her. The reason I brought that up, is because Peter F seemed to think that I somehow was saying it was ok for Salman Rushdie to inadvertently kill people. He failed to include the term "perpetrators of a crime" in the comparison. Also I assumed that they meant covering her head to and from court. I realize now that was silly. But I dont know how you could even link covering ones head for the sake of safety with a Muslim head covering while voting.

I don't think it matters how long one has been chased or if one has been chased at all. But I think this 19 year old Moroccan may have run the risk of an inadverdent death when he opened her car door and stole her purse. I think it is strange that the court will not allow her to cover her face in order to protect herself.

I don't think I have said anything along this lines either. How about you supply a quote to back this one up as well? In this case I was arguing your assertion that Salman Rushdie faced no threat, which you seem to just conveniently toss off as a lot of fluff, while the police certainly found it threatening enough to provide him with protection. Another thing I find extremely strange is that you say that Rushdie is to blame for writing his book. It's a strange choice of words. If you were to say responsible, that might make more sense. But blame implies that he did something bad.

Ummm. I dont know if you are reading the same thread I am, but people were defending the American forces not the soldier.

Rushdie is a self proclaimed atheist.

The Ayatollah declared a fatwa on Rushdie and he lived under police protection for quite some time. I would think it was quite serious. For a long time he was pretty shy of the public eye. In the 80s there was a terrorist attempt on his life in London. The bomb went off early and killed the terrorist. There is a shrine in Tehran dedicated to the man---"the first martyr to die in the mission to kill Rushdie." I think that constitutes more of a threat than Kuzadd's mocking mafia comparison.

Also, re-reading this definition, I say it is inconsistent with what you were saying. In Islam Jesus is considered human, not supernatural or preternatural.

I was using your words, Kuzadd. You said most. And yes I would say you are specifically linking me here: "Hence we see Argus, Jefferiah, and other fundamentalist type "christians" espousing hateful views, half-truths and stereotypes to promote their views."--Kuzadd Unless of course you mean some other Jefferiah. With that last statement I am making a guess at your next contortion feat.

Which hateful view did I espouse? I believe you are the one who said most Christians are willing to kill to fulfill their sick prophecies. Now you find me a hateful view I espoused and we'll call it even.

Why are you wasting your time telling me? I am only giving you the information I get from Muslims themselves, who claim they do not worship Jesus or Mohammed. You should be telling them their concept of worship is meaningless.

Ok, so if you opt for it that way, it simply means your comparison is meaningless. Good day Kuzadd.

Lol. Once again Kuzadd, I will point out: Your comparison-- "Muslims also worship Jesus"-- has nothing to do with how you worship Jesus. When we use the word "also", it implies that we mean it in the same way. Or else it would be a useless comparison to make. I never said that any religion had ownership rights to the term. But it makes no sense to switch between two meanings of the word in a comparison. Take for example these two sentences: I like to poll (conduct surveys). I also like to poll (a boat). While both are meanings of the word "poll" it makes little sense to use them in this case with an "also". Though granted your "worship" and the religious sense of the word "worship" (which is reserved for God alone), are perhaps closer in meaning than these two examples of the word "poll", the difference is still great enough that everyone understands that Muslims do not worship Jesus or Mohammed but only Allah. And I am not the one saying this. This is from Islamic websites. Since Christians use the term worship in the religious manner and their worship of Jesus is in that manner, you are now using the word "worship" with two different meanings connected by an "also", which we use to imply similar meaning. So either you did mean "worship" in the religious sense and are trying so hard to sidestep being wrong that you will say just about anything, or you like to make comparisons that do not make sense.

Lol.... you know Kuzadd you are digging yourself into the realm of the utterly ridiculous now. Several Muslim sites also use worship in this manner, because they certainly make it a point to insist that they do not worship Mohammed, who is more higly regarded than Jesus. So do you claim to know more about Islam than they do. I have given you actual Muslim websites. You mention some letter that you fail to cite. In your initial post you said they "also" "worship" Jesus. Would it not make sense to say that by including them in our "worship" of Jesus, you meant "worship" in the way we mean it. If not, then there was no point in saying it.

And yet, Muslims themselves insist that they do not worship Jesus. Do you claim to know more than they do about Islam? Perhaps your argument is with them Kuzadd. And no, Muslims do not have ardent adoration or devotion for Jesus, neither. So I mean you have said already that you won't waste your time debating with us. More power to you. You should go and start trying to convince the Muslims that they worship Jesus. In the religious sense, worship has a more powerful meaning than the one you have given. This is why not only Argus and I, will continue insisting that Muslims do not worship Jesus, but Muslims themselves will agree.

The fact that they are required to believe in something does not mean that they worship it. This is where you have it entirely wrong, and your original assertion that prompted this argument was that they worshipped Jesus. For instance Kuzadd, I believe in you and that you exist, but I most certainly do not worship you as a deity. I am not using this as an argument against accepting Muslims or a reason to be intolerant about them. I am simply correcting your mistake. Jews do not worship Jesus either, nor do Buddhists. So perhaps there is something more to Islamic culture that makes people critical, than simple ignorant bigotry. That is not to say that all Muslims are bad either. But to say we should encourage more (and specifically) Muslims to come to Canada is strange. Why should we not encourage more Australian aborigines for instance? Why not left-handed lesbians of Latvia? You presume to know more about Islam than Muslims do it seems. "Worship Q: Do muslims worship Muhammad (pbuh) ? A: No! Muslims worship Allah alone. The label "Mohammedans" which implies that Muslim worship Mohammad is therefore misleading and blasphemous. Muslims respect Mohammad as the final messenger of Allah." http://www.islamicinvitationcentre.com/FAQ...AQ_worship.html "Was Muhammad the founder of Islam and do Muslims worship him? In: Islam Of course not! Muslims don't worship but the one and only Allah. Muhammed (pbuh) was the messenger of Allah.please read below.. " http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_Muhammad_the...ims_worship_him "DO Muslims worship Muhammad (pbuh)? According to Islamic belief, the Prophet Muhammad was the last Messenger of God. He, like all of God's prophets and messengers - such as Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus -- was only a human being. Christians came to the mistaken assumption that Muslims worship Muhammad by formulating an incorrect analogy - they worship Jesus so they assumed Muslims worship Muhammad." "Suffice it to say that worshipping Muhammad --- or anyone else --- along with Almighty God is considered to be the worst sin in Islam." http://askmuslims.com/worship.html I challenge you to go to an Islamic forum and ask whether or not they worship Jesus.

That's inconsistent with your own definition of deity. You said they worshipped Jesus, and worship seems to be a theme in these definitions of deity you have given. Neither faith worships prophets. In our case we regard Jesus as more than a prophet. Islam regards Jesus as a prophet only. You do not worship prophets. In Islam the Prophet Mohammed is regarded as more highly than Jesus, and they do not even worship Mohammed, but Allah.