SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   He's a Muslim He's not a Muslim (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=198073)

CaptainHaplo 08-31-12 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen (Post 1928378)
A few years back I wrote that the Right, particlarly the Republican Right, attempst to define and redefine language in their political efforts. I was ridiculed by a few members, of which Haplo was not one, for this assertion.

I am glad I was not one of them - because I agree with you - poltiicians of both sides often redefine words to suite their need.

Quote:

Prior to this, Republican mantra held that this was never the case. Is this to be the latest philisophical concession?
In this case - I am refering to the "new" meaning of the word - not its classical meaning. The "current" meaning of anti-colonial refers to the prevalent third world view that countries that are successful are so at the expense of the countries that struggle. Obviously - the tie in is that the old "imperial" powers are those that are successful by exploiting others. So the "new" definitiion is simply a step away from the "old" one - it is not a total redefinition.

Tribesman 08-31-12 01:55 AM

Quote:

In this case - I am refering to the "new" meaning of the word - not its classical meaning.
yet you have a problem with the meaning of the word marriage and only will accept one fairly new meaning, which of course just recently provided a great example of why the "rev" Wright and any proper Christian can stand up and say "God damn America" and have it carry the authenticity which is unquestionable in those circumstances.

Quote:

he "current" meaning of anti-colonial refers to the prevalent third world view that countries that are successful are so at the expense of the countries that struggle.
That is about the wierdest definition of colonialism I have ever heard. is it a new made up nonsense version?

Kongo Otto 09-03-12 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 1928267)
Evangelicals have zero tolerance to anyone who believes differently then they do.

Islam has zero tolerance to anyone who believes differently then they do.
So where is the difference?
:hmmm:

Tribesman 09-03-12 02:34 AM

Quote:

Islam has zero tolerance to anyone who believes differently then they do.
So where is the difference?
No, but it is easily fixed. that is the modern version of fundamentalism in Islam which came about in just about the same time as the Christian evangelicals were moving eastward beyond europe.
So fairly recent fundamentalist christians and fairly recent fundamentalist muslims... where is the difference?

Bubblehead1980 09-03-12 03:20 AM

The OP asked why does it matter? Hmm perhaps because Islam is in direct contradiction of the US Constitution and our basic cultural beliefs.The global interests of the US are not always(if ever) in line with the interests of the Islamic world, thus the clash of civilizations.Having the most powerful person in the world following a faith that is in direct contradiction of our countries history, law, culture, and interests is a threat to our country.

I do not believe Obama is a muslim(believe he is an atheist myself but uses religion as a tool) but he does have "muslim sympathies" due to his father being a muslim as well as spending some of his formative years in Indonesia, a muslim country.These sympathies apparently come to light in his behavior and attitude towards Israel as well as other remarks he has made, such as apology tour after his inauguration.

Penguin 09-03-12 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980 (Post 1929542)
Having the most powerful person in the world following a faith that is in direct contradiction of our countries history, law, culture, and interests is a threat to our country.

So I presume you won't vote for Romney?

Bubblehead1980 09-03-12 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin (Post 1929543)
So I presume you won't vote for Romney?

No, I will.I believe Romney is more a cultural mormon than anything.I find all religions to be silly but some are certainly more of a threat than others, islam is one of them.I would not vote for Romney if I thought he was a real, hardcore Mormon but his life shows, from what I can tell, he is a reasonable man.I did not support him in the primary but I am okay with him as president, at least he understands basic, real world economics, unlike the current occupant of the white house or his cronies.

Penguin 09-03-12 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980 (Post 1929547)
I believe Romney is more a cultural moron than anything.

Oh, I believe that too! :haha:
However according to the WSJ, one in 4 Americans have concerns regarding a Mormon President. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...022741022.html) - more than would have concerns with a black or a female President.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980 (Post 1929547)
I find all religions to be silly but some are certainly more of a threat than others, islam is one of them.I would not vote for Romney if I thought he was a real, hardcore Mormon but his life shows, from what I can tell, he is a reasonable man.I did not support him in the primary but I am okay with him as president, at least he understands basic, real world economics, unlike the current occupant of the white house or his cronies.

What's strange is that someone can be a cultural Mormon or Christian, but apparently not a cultural Muslim, as if there are no non-fundamental interpretations. You don't expect most Christians to kill their neighbor who works on the 7th day, but expect any Muslim to take the quran literally?
Even if Obama was a Muslim, as soon as he would put his faith before the Constitution, he would have broken his oath and could be sawed off.

Maybe we could also take a look at the older Bush, who said that atheists can be neither patriots nor citizens... (http://www.robsherman.com/advocacy/060401a.htm) Sounds like he let his faith dictate his judgements and discriminates against the free exercise of no religion.


Regarding real life economics: Well, at least Romney knows real world loopholes that allow him to dodge taxes. How Romney's Millions Went Tax-Free Overseas
I see a conflict of interests here: Closing those loopholes would be in the best interest of Uncle Sam, but not in his personal interest.

Blacklight 09-03-12 08:36 PM

Franky, it saddens me that a person can't get elected president in this country without being "religious" to a certain extent. An atheist, for instance, would NEVER be able to be elected in this country. A person's religion shouldn't even be coming into this debate. This country is built on the concept of "freedom of religion". There is also supposed to be a separation of church and state that the Religious Right seem to have forgotten.
I don't understand why it would be such a controversy and so horrible if someone who just happened to be of another religion aside from "Christian" or no religion at all were elected. To a certain HUGE demographic, it would be the end of civilization as we know it.
And what the far Right is doing to the Muslims is just plain wrong. All they're doing is adding to the fire that Joe Redneck who doesn't exist outside his own little protected world is kindling over his fear of anything not completely familiar to him in his closed little world.

eddie 09-03-12 09:51 PM

When Rep. Keith Ellison from Minnesota was sworn in, instead of having his hand on the Bible, he used a very historic copy of the Koran. You know who it originally belonged to? It was none other then Thomas Jefferson,lol

Ellison's district is mainly made up of Christian"s too!:D That district includes Minneapolis!

Skybird 09-04-12 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blacklight (Post 1929939)
Franky, it saddens me that a person can't get elected president in this country without being "religious" to a certain extent. An atheist, for instance, would NEVER be able to be elected in this country. A person's religion shouldn't even be coming into this debate. This country is built on the concept of "freedom of religion". There is also supposed to be a separation of church and state that the Religious Right seem to have forgotten.
I don't understand why it would be such a controversy and so horrible if someone who just happened to be of another religion aside from "Christian" or no religion at all were elected. To a certain HUGE demographic, it would be the end of civilization as we know it.
And what the far Right is doing to the Muslims is just plain wrong. All they're doing is adding to the fire that Joe Redneck who doesn't exist outside his own little protected world is kindling over his fear of anything not completely familiar to him in his closed little world.

By intention of the founding fathers and the historic documents they authored, the US is a great design and a noble vision. But it got hijacked, namely by big business, and by religious zealots. It's like having blood and bone cancer at the same time. It destroys from within.

Bubblehead1980 09-04-12 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddie (Post 1929947)
When Rep. Keith Ellison from Minnesota was sworn in, instead of having his hand on the Bible, he used a very historic copy of the Koran. You know who it originally belonged to? It was none other then Thomas Jefferson,lol

Ellison's district is mainly made up of Christian"s too!:D That district includes Minneapolis!

I have heard Ellision speak a few times, he needs to be voted out, he is a dangerous fool.

soopaman2 09-04-12 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August (Post 1928245)
It's not so much the religion itself but rather the lie he's told if the claim is true (I don't believe it BTW). Americans want their presidents to be seen as honest and truthful at all times.

It's why the Republicans were able to make so much political hay over Bill Clinton having sex with Monica Lewinsky. It wasn't the illicit sex itself, it wasn't even the desecration of the oval office, it was Clinton going on TV and wagging his finger in the face of the American people while telling them a bald faced lie. Had he come clean the issue would have quickly faded but his lie gave it legs far beyond it's expiration date.

That's also why the Democrats accused the Bush administration of deliberately lying about Saddams WMD instead of just being taken in by the same bad intel that they are on record as believing before he took office. Few would have cared if Bush was just wrong but when you add an element of deception and suddenly people care a great deal which was the whole point of making the accusation in the first place.

Had the parties been reversed in both situations the accusations would still have been made.

Yes, and yes.

Clinton outright lied, which peeved the hell outta people.

Bush did too. But the difference between Clintons lie and Bushes lie was 6000+ American dead, many more thousands maimed. And hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq.

Who gives a crap if Obama is a Muslim?

Far right wackos do. Same far right wackos who scream second amendment after every gun rampage, then forget about the first amendment allowing you to pray to whatever invisible spook in the sky you wanted to.

nikimcbee 09-04-12 08:27 PM

ya'll are wrong, He's Jewish now.:haha:
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes.../09/obama1.jpg

Oi veh!

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazin...Jewish-150.jpg


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.