After Nice, Newt Gingrich wants to ‘test’ every Muslim in the U.S. and deport sharia believers

[tod evans]

We agree that the fed gov should never have been permitted... But they did. So, x we are here. They have caused this situation and intentionally. Until that is curtailed and the result, cleaned up, I don't exactly feel comfortable closing my eyes and just hoping it all turns out ok. Because they caused the situation so that it wouldn't.

We can only skirt possible solutions on the interwebs.....

Discussing federal authority however is permissible.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Can someone please clarify for me what belief in Sharia requires? Does it mean one believes that govt should enforce it, OR does it mean one believes in the right of individuals to voluntarily submit themselves to some Islamic authority? I don't see how libertarians could oppose the latter. As long as someone willingly chooses to submit, is there any case for banning Sharia?

Sharia Law cannot coexist with our Constitution. It's a form of government, legal system, etc.

Power to whomever wants to live under sharia law, but it should be in those countries who operate under that system. It is not here.

 

[kahless]

Sharia Law cannot coexist with our Constitution. It's a form of government, legal system, etc.

Power to whomever wants to live under sharia law, but it should be in those countries who operate under that system. It is not here.

Yet we have a group people here in a pro-liberty forum that either unwittingly or intentionally are hell bent on opening our borders to those whose quest is to deny us "individual liberty" in favor of Sharia and whom reject all forms of Constitutional surveillance to prevent harm against our citizens for that ideological quest of Sharia.

 

[tod evans]

Yet we have a group people here in a pro-liberty forum that either unwittingly or intentionally are hell bent on opening our borders to those whose quest is to deny us "individual liberty" in favor of Sharia and whom reject all forms of Constitutional surveillance to prevent harm against our citizens for that ideological quest of Sharia.

I am hell bent on securing your freedom to effectively remove any type of people you find offensive from your town county or even state.

I'm also hell bent on preventing you or anyone else from granting Fed-Gov the powers to impose their ideas of equality and inclusiveness on those people who don't want it.

 

[AtlantaIconoclast]

Sharia Law cannot coexist with our Constitution. It's a form of government, legal system, etc.

Power to whomever wants to live under sharia law, but it should be in those countries who operate under that system. It is not here.

Then we would also have to end the Jewish legal system among the orthodox Jewish communities, and the Mormon Courts, and the Amish courts, etc. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/180931

 

[tod evans]

Then we would also have to end the Jewish legal system among the orthodox Jewish communities, and the Mormon Courts, and the Amish courts, etc. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/180931

^^^^^^^This is exactly where Fed-Gov takes the country. ^^^^^^^^

There's too many people, too far away, who want to tell me how to behave out here in the Ozark Mountains..

I don't want to tell them how to behave.......:o

 

[kahless]

I am hell bent on securing your freedom to effectively remove any type of people you find offensive from your town county or even state.

I'm also hell bent on preventing you or anyone else from granting Fed-Gov the powers to impose their ideas of equality and inclusiveness on those people who don't want it.

You and 69630, right to the stock typical Progressive - SJW reply that is not based on the topic we are having but rather right to accusations of intolerance. This has nothing to do with hating Muslims or finding certain individuals offensive. This is about securing our borders and nation from an enemy that rejects the Constitution, individual liberty and is intent on causing us harm. Border controls and surveillance of those that have stated such is within bounds of the Constitution.

 

[kahless]

Then we would also have to end the Jewish legal system among the orthodox Jewish communities, and the Mormon Courts, and the Amish courts, etc. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/180931

An invalid comparison since it is for themselves and their people, not to be forced upon everyone else like Sharia.

 

[69360]

So Rand hates Muslims to now to.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rand-paul-pushes-back-on-calls-for-more-surveillance/

[MENTION=12547]tod evans[/MENTION], Rand is as dense as I am I guess.

Nice dodge attempt. Cherry picked quote and all.

Do you hate muslims or not? It sure would explain your veracity in pushing this topic. Very few here will judge you if you just admit it.

 

[kahless]

"I think surveillance, though, has a fairly low threshold for individuals," Paul said. "Yes we should follow people who are a risk. Should we talk to their neighbors and friends, should we talk to their Imam, sure all of that is legitimate. But should we target mosques and have a database of Muslims - absolutely not."

kahless must have me blocked so that he doesn't have to respond when I refute him. How convenient. Perhaps someone else would care to clue him in on the entire quote.

I posted the part of Rand's quote I agree with which was more importantly part of the discussion. If Rand still believes we should not have surveillance of Mosques then I disagree with him since it is really should not be an issue to listen to what they are preaching.

 

[Ender]

An invalid comparison since it is for themselves and their people, not to be forced upon everyone else like Sharia.

WRONG.

It would soon be applied to all. There is a reason the states would not ratify the Constitution w/o the Amendments. Gov is dangerous and ALWAYS takes more and more and more...ad nauseum.

Religions have always been persecuted- the US has a history of this- witches burned, Catholics enslaved, Mormons shot and killed- let the gov put Muslims under surveillance and soon it will be everyone except the State Religion.

Also there are 73 different sects of Islam- just like there are different sects of Christianity. Very few approve of force.

http://www.real-islam.org/73_8.htm

 

[Ender]

You and others are consistently opposing surveillance of those publicly demanding violent overthrow of our government to replace it with a more repressive ideology. There are posts in this thread basically demanding that we allow those same types to come here.

That is not only favoring Sharia it is giving aid and comfort to terrorists.

A real terrorist can get anywhere they want to- don't need no stinkin' laws.

 

[kahless]

WRONG.

It would soon be applied to all. There is a reason the states would not ratify the Constitution w/o the Amendments. Gov is dangerous and ALWAYS takes more and more and more...ad nauseum.

Religions have always been persecuted- the US has a history of this- witches burned, Catholics enslaved, Mormons shot and killed- let the gov put Muslims under surveillance and soon it will be everyone except the State Religion.

Also there are 73 different sects of Islam- just like there are different sects of Christianity. Very few approve of force.

http://www.real-islam.org/73_8.htm

I posted the Muslim support for Sharia both within the US and outside the US in this thread several times and in replies to you. They overwhelming support it and in the US believe it should supersede or used in combination with the Constitution. Sharia would in fact soon be applied to all if Muslims dominate any geo-political boundary within the US.

 

[Krugminator2]

Then we would also have to end the Jewish legal system among the orthodox Jewish communities, and the Mormon Courts, and the Amish courts, etc. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/180931

I'll save you trouble. I'll provide you a free anti-Semitic template for every one of your posts.

"Jew Jew Jew. Bad Jew. Jew Jew Jew. Rotten Jew Zionist. Jew JJewJEJJEJEJWWJWJWJ. Rand Paul Jew lover. Jew Jew Jew. Icky Jew. Donald Trump courageous for taking on Jews. Jew Jew Jew. Palestine great. Jew terrorist. Jew JOO JOOWISH."

I am sure Sharia Law is on exactly on the same plane as whatever Orthodox Jews, Mormons, or the Amish believe. Just today the Jews in my town stoned someone to death for having a beer on the Sabbath. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/25/iranian-pair-death-penalty-alcohol

 

[tod evans]

You and 69630, right to the stock typical Progressive - SJW reply that is not based on the topic we are having but rather right to accusations of intolerance. This has nothing to do with hating Muslims or finding certain individuals offensive. This is about securing our borders and nation from an enemy that rejects the Constitution, individual liberty and is intent on causing us harm. Border controls and surveillance of those that have stated such is within bounds of the Constitution.

Your wrong and completely full of shit.

Permitting federal surveillance is in no way shape or form proscribed in the constitution, border defense is but then we enter into the subject of defense from whom or what, both subjects I haven't addressed.

You're completely out of line and off your rocker what with attributing things to me never typed......

 

[kahless]

You're completely out of line and off your rocker what with attributing things to me never typed......

In your own words bolded below you went right to playing the intolerance card.

I am hell bent on securing your freedom to effectively remove any type of people you find offensive from your town county or even state.

I'm also hell bent on preventing you or anyone else from granting Fed-Gov the powers to impose their ideas of equality and inclusiveness on those people who don't want it.

Your wrong and completely full of shit.

Permitting federal surveillance is in no way shape or form proscribed in the constitution, border defense is but then we enter into the subject of defense from whom or what, both subjects I haven't addressed.

With a warrant it is. The issue is when it is done without a warrant or in bulk without cause against citizens. Rand has taken issue of being done without it individualized. I posted in this thread quotes fromr Rand where he has no problem with surveillance of individuals.

 

[tod evans]

In your own words bolded below you went right to playing the intolerance card.

I don't speak kid, what the fuck are you talking about? In simple English please, I'm a simple guy.

With a warrant it is. The issue is when it is done without a warrant or in bulk without cause against citizens. Rand has taken issue of being done without it individualized. I posted in this thread quotes fromr Rand where he has no problem with surveillance of individuals.

I very clearly stated that if Rand is cool with the feds carrying out surveillance within these borders then I disagree with him.

 

[kahless]

I don't speak kid, what the fuck are you talking about? In simple English please, I'm a simple guy.

Now you are going make like you do not know what that is. Race card, intolerance card, no difference. Besides insults and condescension, when someone cannot debate on facts your behavior is what they stoop as demonstrated in your last few replies.

You accuse me of intolerance then make the claim that I am "attributing things to me never typed" when it is all there including what you bolded.

 

[69360]

He neg repped me rather than answer the question if he hates muslims or not.

I suspect we won't get an answer. But if he does or not, it's fine by me if he does but wrong to use the fed to enforce his hate.

 

[phill4paul]

With a warrant it is. The issue is when it is done without a warrant or in bulk without cause against citizens. Rand has taken issue of being done without it individualized. I posted in this thread quotes fromr Rand where he has no problem with surveillance of individuals.

Exactly. Which is why I included the last part of the paragraph you snipped. This thread is about Ginrich, who wants all Muslims in the U.S. interrogated. Do you not see the difference?