Burn a Qu'ran Day.

[nicky10013]

Yep. At least "someone" does. And once again, it's Muslims' sensitivities that are being respected; and of course people who are condemning others for being emotional about a mosque going up on property damaged by other Muslims on 9-11 think this is soooo great. So good that someone has the "common sense" to respect Muslims' emotions over a book.

It's ludicrous, really.

Jon Stewart had a really good point last night on his show. While it may be true that certain pastors are taking slack for wanting to burn a book, Muslims are taking heat merely for reading from them.

As for the rest of this pile of tripe, why don't you just say what you clearly believe? That all muslims are responsible for 9/11? You've come closest to doing that here. Something tells me you're just aching to get it off your chest.

[Guest American Woman]

Jon Stewart had a really good point last night on his show. While it may be true that certain pastors are taking slack for wanting to burn a book, Muslims are taking heat merely for reading from them.

Yes, that's what they're "taking slack" for. :rolleyes:

As for the rest of this pile of tripe, why don't you just say what you clearly believe? That all muslims are responsible for 9/11? You've come closest to doing that here. Something tells me you're just aching to get it off your chest.

I will when you you admit that you're a terrorist sympathizer. You go first.

Edited September 9, 2010 by American Woman

[waldo]

And once again, it's Muslims' sensitivities that are being respected; and of course people who are condemning others for being emotional about a mosque going up on property damaged by other Muslims on 9-11 think this is soooo great. So good that someone has the "common sense" to respect Muslims' emotions over a book.

It's ludicrous, really.

if nothing else, you are consistent... as you continue to conflate an extremist element to Muslims at large.

[nicky10013]

Yes, that's what they're "taking slack" for. :rolleyes:

Then what are they taking slack for? They've done nothing wrong and everyone here has never proved anything to the contrary.

I will when you you admit that you're a terrorist sympathizer. You go first.

Hahahahahah and you've inched even closer. I'm a terrorist sympathizer because god forbid muslims be allowed to practice. By your logic, since I support moderate muslims and am a terrorist lover, then by natural extension all muslims are terrorists. Why don't you just say it?

[Shady]

And once again, it's Muslims' sensitivities that are being respected

Exactly.

Anyone else getting tired of kowtowing to these sensitivities? Movie villians being changed from Muslims to Russians. Newspapers and magazines choosing not to print the Danish cartoons. South Park censoring their own television shows. And now this. I'm getting pretty sick and tired of it.

The moral of the story. The threat of violence gets you what you want. Perhaps environmentalist groups, and pro-life groups, anti-illegal immigration groups, pro-marijuana groups, etc, just need to adopt a more violent way of doing things. It seems to do a pretty good job of achieving a group's objectives.

[Guest American Woman]

Then what are they taking slack for? They've done nothing wrong and everyone here has never proved anything to the contrary.

Again, not going to repeat yet again what's been said ad nauseum. Keep living in your narrow little world. I have the feeling you're very comfortable there.

Hahahahahah and you've inched even closer. I'm a terrorist sympathizer because god forbid muslims be allowed to practice. By your logic, since I support moderate muslims and am a terrorist lover, then by natural extension all muslims are terrorists. Why don't you just say it?

Evidently you do have a problem with comprehension. Unlike you with your accusations, I didn't accuse you of anything. Try really hard to get what I did say ....... really hard. Who knows? You might even get it.

In the meantime, every time you tell me to admit that I blame all Muslims, I'll come back telling you to admit that you are a terrorist sympathizer. And if you don't get it, well, it'll just be one more thing that you don't get..........

Edited September 9, 2010 by American Woman

[nicky10013]

Exactly.

Anyone else getting tired of kowtowing to these sensitivities? Movie villians being changed from Muslims to Russians. Newspapers and magazines choosing not to print the Danish cartoons. South Park censoring their own television shows. And now this. I'm getting pretty sick and tired of it.

The moral of the story. The threat of violence gets you what you want. Perhaps environmentalist groups, and pro-life groups, anti-illegal immigration groups, pro-marijuana groups, etc, just need to adopt a more violent way of doing things. It seems to do a pretty good job of achieving a group's objectives.

There are eco-terrorists, the anti-illegal immigration have vigilantes who sit at the border, abortion clinics have been bombed. As for pot smokers, well, they're too lazy to do anything.

As for sensibilities, what sensibilities? Funny, you hate THEIR sensibilities yet while complaining thet theirs have been taken into account, what you so desperately want is nothing more than your sensibilities stroked.

The problem with your argument is that while the government is "ignoring" your sensibilities (which is crap), muslims sensibilities, (you know, stupid stuff like actually being able to go to a mosque without being called a terrorists) actually have a legal argument behind them. As in it's their constitutional right. There's no little adendum to the first amendment declaring this right null and void to muslims.

As for burning books and freedom of speech, freedom of speech applies, but there's always exceptions that all could agree upon. For instance, this example is pretty damn close to the fire in a theatre analogy. In the end, it's the guy's right to scream it out, but it could have seriously bad consequences. Just like for troops serving overseas where these radicals actually do operate.

[nicky10013]

Again, not going to repeat yet again what's been said ad nauseum. Keep living in your narrow little world. I have the feeling you're very comfortable there.

Nothing has been said ad nauseum. The fact that you refuse to comply merely confirms my belief there's no real reason behind the opposition of this mosque other than the fact that you don't like muslim people.

As for me living in a narrow little world, that may certainly be true. However, I find it hilariously hypocrytical that someone who opposes the most basic right (to worship) for a group of people with no connection at all to a horrible event 10 years ago is actually calling me narrow.

Now THAT'S ludicrous!

Evidently you do have a problem with comprehension. Unlike you with your accusations, I didn't accuse you of anything. Try really hard to get what I did say ....... really hard. Who knows? You might even get it.

In the meantime, every time you tell me to admit that I blame all Muslims, I'll come back telling you to admit that you are a terrorist sympathizer. And if you don't get it, well, it'll just be one more thing that you don't get..........

What is there to get. You called me a terrorist sympathizer. Usually that's it. Something tells me you're all out of arguments, so now we're entering circular logic time to try and fix it. Tip: that only usually makes things worse.

[Guest American Woman]

What is there to get. You called me a terrorist sympathizer. Usually that's it. Something tells me you're all out of arguments, so now we're entering circular logic time to try and fix it. Tip: that only usually makes things worse.

Ummm. No. I didn't call you a terrorist sympathizer. Nothing of the sort. Go back and read it again. And again. And again. As many times as it takes to "get" what I did say.

Something tells me expecting you to get what people are actually saying is a waste of time .....

Have a good day.

[Shady]

There are eco-terrorists, the anti-illegal immigration have vigilantes who sit at the border, abortion clinics have been bombed.

Yes, and do we capitulate to their actions and demands? Nope. There's only one group of people we do that for.

[DogOnPorch]

Islam still sucks.

[nicky10013]

Yes, and do we capitulate to their actions and demands? Nope. There's only one group of people we do that for.

What demands are we giving in to?

[Shady]

What demands are we giving in to?

Censorship of our speech and our press.

[nicky10013]

Censorship of our speech and our press.

That's not what I asked. You said we don't give into the demands of eco-terrorists and abortion clinic bombers, yet we give in to the demands of terrorists overseas. Now, for us to give in to demands, there ahve to be demands to begin with. What are those demands we're giving in to?

[Shady]

That's not what I asked. You said we don't give into the demands of eco-terrorists and abortion clinic bombers, yet we give in to the demands of terrorists overseas. Now, for us to give in to demands, there ahve to be demands to begin with. What are those demands we're giving in to?

Not publishing the Danish cartoons.

Not broadcasting the South Park episode.

Not opposing the Ground Zero mosque.

Not burning pieces of paper in protest.

[M.Dancer]

The BBQ has bee called off.

[nicky10013]

Not publishing the Danish cartoons.

Not broadcasting the South Park episode.

Not opposing the Ground Zero mosque.

Not burning pieces of paper in protest.

The government shut these things down how?

[punked]

Yah the Government was willing to let do what they wanted. It was public opinion which changed it. In the NY mosque though the GOP wants the government to turn all the blocks around ground zero into a park so they all approval for zoning has to go through the congress. The GOP is always for growing government that is a fact.

[Guest American Woman]

Yah the Government was willing to let do what they wanted. It was public opinion which changed it. In the NY mosque though the GOP wants the government to turn all the blocks around ground zero into a park so they all approval for zoning has to go through the congress. The GOP is always for growing government that is a fact.

Yeah, I'm sure the FBI had nothing to do with it. They were just stopping by to reinforce how willing they were to let him do what he wanted.

FBI urges minister to call off Koran burning

Edited September 9, 2010 by American Woman

[Pliny]

The moral of the story. The threat of violence gets you what you want. Perhaps environmentalist groups, and pro-life groups, anti-illegal immigration groups, pro-marijuana groups, etc, just need to adopt a more violent way of doing things. It seems to do a pretty good job of achieving a group's objectives.

I hear pro-marijuana activists want the anti-marijuana crowd to get stoned. Something to give some serious thought to.

[bush_cheney2004]

....As for burning books and freedom of speech, freedom of speech applies, but there's always exceptions that all could agree upon. For instance, this example is pretty damn close to the fire in a theatre analogy. In the end, it's the guy's right to scream it out, but it could have seriously bad consequences. Just like for troops serving overseas where these radicals actually do operate.

This is clearly not one of those exceptions. The troops have already angered the "radicals" just by being there.

...I'm still burning mine!

[Pliny]

Yah the Government was willing to let do what they wanted. It was public opinion which changed it. In the NY mosque though the GOP wants the government to turn all the blocks around ground zero into a park so they all approval for zoning has to go through the congress. The GOP is always for growing government that is a fact.

In some cases, out of fear that the added expense of security would be a necessity to prevent a beheading, and in a few cases pressure from government.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Pliny

[punked]

Yeah, I'm sure the FBI had nothing to do with it. They were just stopping by to reinforce how willing they were to let him do what he wanted.

FBI urges minister to call off Koran burning

Just as the FBI can't stop flag burnings they can't stop book burnings. End of story. Might want to look it up.

[punked]

In some cases, out of fear that the added expense of security would be a necessity, and in a few cases pressure from government.

I know Conservatives are always for bigger government. I know.

[Guest American Woman]

Just as the FBI can't stop flag burnings they can't stop book burnings. End of story. Might want to look it up.

Ummm. My comment was in response to your comment about the GOP wanting government involvement. You think the FBI was there at the Republicans' request?