Printable View
Now this is what I am trying to understand. Because Mike did not add any details here as to why he has a problem with this event. Is this an event where Americans (Islamic Americans) are coming from all over the US to just pray together. Or are they trying to get the Gov to institute a day of gov sanctioned prayer. If they are trying to get Gov to take part in prayer I have an issue with that. Just like I do with the Christians do that crap too.Quote:
Originally Posted by islandermyk
[ROFL1][Beer] Tha's coo man... we gotta pay the bills and buy'em toys somehow!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mtn.man
an alien, who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population, although alleged to be illegally here."Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
This is patently where I have a problem with the decision of the court in 1886. The troublesome part of your justification lies in your quoted, supposed precedent. "has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction"
To which in my interpretation means become a naturalized citizen, or here on a visa, etc. And paying taxes if they are earning a wage.
The case cited presents an excellent case for review and scrutiny due to the language. It's rather obtuse reference to "a part of its population" seems to circumvent the laws regarding legal immigration into this country .
It does not, however, override current immigration laws.
You got me... [Coffee]Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
.. but in hopes that it doesn't go there as well... "If they are trying to get Gov to take part in prayer I have an issue with that"
The above case has to do with the right to constitutional protections and laws. It does not state that illegals are the same as citizens. It deals with everyone having the right to their day in court. Here is where I got that case from. http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rights...egalrights.htmQuote:
Originally Posted by Drilldov2.0
OK now....everyone check your balls.
[Bouncy]
I fully understand the meaning of the ruling. You did just contradict yourself though stating: " It does not state that illegals are the same as citizens. It deals with everyone having the right to their day in court."Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
I am wondering if you think that "everyone having their day in court" includes illegals?
5 pages of the same argument from a previous thread last week. You talk about islam, then somebody uses the constitution to stand up fir them. All the while never thinking about the fact that Islam is a societal belief structure. Including religion, Sharia law and keeping the church and state as one entity.
Our constitution and bill of rights call for the separation of church and state. Which Islam, if a true practicing Muslim, includes Sharia. To practice Sharia in the United States is to go against our constitution, which means you forfeit the rights it gives. If you choose to live outside our laws, you chose to lose your rights. So by practicing Islam, not just a religion, you forfeit the right for it to be protected for you to do so.
I have one question for all of you that are bent out of shape about Islam being religion/gov't.
there is a new guy running for pres. right leaning, pro-gun, pro-life, small gov't, less taxes, the whole right leaning package, but he is an affirmed atheist. Hell, one up it, he is Satanic (hasn't killed a goat or anything weird). Do you vote for him? You willing to put your pen to paper, making him the POTUS? For many of you, I have my doubts. To claim that Islam is weird because the line gets fuzzy is nonsense, every religion, EVERY religion, does.
The Constitution didn't lay out who gets what, you can pray to a retarded space goat that eats its own shit for all I care, not my problem, hell, if you want, get a petition, pass a law, and legalize Goat Prayer at NFL games. Go for it.
I say if you want to ban it, you are the one who is willing to ignore, and BETRAY the document my ancestors fought, and a few of them died, to protect. Hows that for PC?
When someone takes the pledge I care about one part, the flag they say it to, so long as they are a loyal and good American, the "under God" part can be referring to a goat in their head, that's their business, and theirs alone.
You can't take the rights you don't agree with and expect yours to be protected. If freedom of religion is off the table all the sudden because of "white men with guns." I have a feeling if that happens there is no way anyone will have your back when the guns are on the table. There is no footnote in the Constitution that says "or whatever, pick the parts you want"
If my freedom means people get to pray to a God I don't believe in, in a religion I don't understand, that means they are working!
Rock on America, this place is the best, even our "enemy" wants to live here. By the way, there are plenty of Muslims out there today, in the trenches next to the bravest sons and daughters of the US, shooting their own religious brethren. Hell, that means there are Muslims out there, right now, doing more to stop terrorism and protect the freedoms we enjoy in the US than YOU (assuming you aren't reading this from the Mid-East)! Hows that for something to chew on?
P.S. ball check comes up as two, thanks for the concern.
I have stopped seeing the political spectrum in the US as Right v. Left, I think this is a political creation. It seems to me the more honest and real divide is Freedom v. Control. Tax levels, minimum wage, social security, welfare, gay marriage, at the end of the day, this stuff is all small fries that in 100 years no one will remember, what people will remember is if our freedoms were protected or if they were lost. That's it, I am just waiting for the people from the far left and the people from the far right to realize what they really want is the freedom to be left alone, be it to smoke a pipe, marry a dude, or own a high cap magazine to protect their family. These people will realize they share little down deep with those they once saw as allies politically beyond surface level fluff, like tax loopholes. The true, and principled respect of freedom means, you have to respect the freedoms that you don't enjoy, thereby giving others the same freedom, if you can't do that, you like control, its just a matter of admitting it. No one wants control leveled on themselves, the question is, do you want control leveled on others?
[Bang]
Islam is not just a religion...
if it were, your arguments would be valid.
its like saying that because I believe that killing everyone that doesn't believe the same way I do is my religion I should be allowed to do it.
Freedom of religion ends when it transgresses on the rights of others.