Social-Cons are scared to DEATH of Muslims. Why?

[Sola_Fide]

And if I post women being mutilated right here in this country, what would that mean?

It would mean it is against the law in this country. Not SANCTIONED in law like in Muslim societies.


All I'm saying is stop with the stupid equivocation. Stop trying to equivocate at every turn. There is nothing wrong in defending Liberty in the face of tyrannical sysyems, whether they manifest themselves in theism or atheism.


Liberty-loving people don't have to automatically accept the system of Islam just because neo-cons are against it right now. That's all I am saying....

 

[specsaregood]

Did they have a choice? No. Remember, Islam=Submission. (exact opposite of libertarianism)

It doesn't mean submission to government though. It means submission to the will of god. I don't see why that would have to conflict with libertarianism.

 

[LibertyVox]

It would mean it is against the law in this country. Not SANCTIONED in law like in Muslim societies.


All I'm saying is stop with the stupid equivocation. Stop trying to equivocate at every turn. There is nothing wrong in defending Liberty in the face of tyrannical sysyems, whether they manifest themselves in theism or atheism.


Liberty-loving people don't have to automatically accept the system of Islam just because neo-cons are against it right now. That's all I am saying....

And which country has sanctioned cutting the nose as an official "punishment"?

There is nothing "liberty-loving" in your angry outbursts here btw.
You are in fact quite typical of the mentality out there. The mentality against which Ron Paul --the lone lion-- came out against so strongly. It's a sad day when someone like Dr. Paul feels the need to come out and use strong words to cut through the piling crap of what Matt here correctly refers to as so cons.

It is people like Ron Paul who stand in the way this country becoming a third world, demagoguery, mob rule.

 

[Sola_Fide]

And which country has sanctioned cutting the nose as an official "punishment"?

There is nothing "liberty-loving" in your angry outbursts here btw.
You are in fact quite typical of the mentality out there. The mentality against which Ron Paul --the lone lion-- came out against so strongly. It's a sad day when someone like Dr. Paul feels the need to come out and use strong words to cut through the piling crap of what Matt here correctly refers to as so cons.

It is people like Ron Paul who stand in the way this country becoming a third world, demagoguery, mob rule.

Angry outbursts? Nah. I'm not angry.


Listen, I don't believe that the State should be used as a tool to coerce society. That is why I am fundamentally opposed to the mosque/state system of Islam...just as I am opposed to neo-conservatism and Communism etc. etc. etc...


I see it more as a philosophical debate than anything. I don't want to coerce Muslim societies to be like America through force. But I also don't want to live under a tyranny like Sharia.

 

[LibertyVox]

Muslim societies? Have you been to a Muslim majority country? I have, and where I've been the Christians 15% live peacefully with the 85% Muslims. You seriously have a distorted view of Islam and are not a student of history at all. Stop believing crap on the internet, and get down to real life and meet some of them and visit some countries.

What's more hilarious and disturbing at the same is the fact that such ignorance exists in this country which I consider arguably the world's premier country where the tools of individual empowerment and knowledge including the internet, and education are so widely available. Even more hilarious is that most people in this country have middle eastern names, follow a middle eastern religion, worship a middle eastern guy whose alleged papa was a middle eastern god, and yet have very scant knowledge of that region.
Sad.
Or perhaps I am being too harsh given that I 've been there all over the place. In that case I recommend travel with extra money instead of wasting it on the new Jetta which you can't even afford.

 

[LibertyVox]

Angry outbursts? Nah. I'm not angry.


Listen, I don't believe that the State should be used as a tool to coerce society. That is why I am fundamentally opposed to the mosque/state system of Islam...just as I am opposed to neo-conservatism and Communism etc. etc. etc...


I see it more as a philosophical debate than anything. I don't want to coerce Muslim societies to be like America through force. But I also don't want to live under a tyranny like Sharia.

There is no country where a muslim power is coercing Shari'a. But there are plenty of muislim countires whose populace we've mercilessly butchered to enforce democracy imperialism.

 

[jmdrake]

Propaganda works on the simple-minded very well.

And yet "some enlightened atheists" are just as "simple-minded".

See: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2859945&postcount=103

 

[jmdrake]

These women didn't seem very happy about having Sharia law imposed on them.

Did they have a choice? No. Remember, Islam=Submission. (exact opposite of libertarianism)

Iranian Women Protest Against Islamic Law
YouTube - Iranian Women Protest Against Islamic Law

I don't think they'd be too happy living under the Mosaic law either. Have you ever read it? (Hint, it's in the Bible).

Now ask yourself this question. Just how would "Sharia law" be implemented in the U.S.? By vote? Have you compared the U.S. Muslim population to the non Muslim population? Have you done any analysis on the number of Muslims immigrating to this country to the number of non Muslims? Most immigrants these days come from Latin America. The overwhelming majority of Latin Americans are Catholic. So which religious system is most likely to be enforced?

 

[Jace]

What's more hilarious and disturbing at the same is the fact that such ignorance exists in this country which I consider arguably the world's premier country where the tools of individual empowerment and knowledge including the internet, and education are so widely available. Even more hilarious is that most people in this country have middle eastern names, follow a middle eastern religion, worship a middle eastern guy whose alleged papa was a middle eastern god, and yet have very scant knowledge of that region.
Sad.
Or perhaps I am being too harsh given that I 've been there all over the place. In that case I recommend travel with extra money instead of wasting it on the new Jetta which you can't even afford.

We got it. You dislike Christians. Americans are hypocrites and ignorant, hilariously so.

We should welcome Muslims here in the millions. A mosque on every street corner and we should alter our behavior so we don't offend them, because we are ignorant and bigoted and they invented Algebra in the 7th century.

The fact that France, India, China, Thailand, etc. have experienced violent clashes with their large minority Muslim populations shouldn't concern anyone.

Islam is a libertarian creed and those of us who believe the religion has strongly intolerant views on freedom of speech, freedom of dress, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, etc. are morons.

 

[LibertyVox]

We got it. You dislike Christians. Americans are hypocrites and ignorant, hilariously so.

We should welcome Muslims here in the millions. A mosque on every street corner and we should alter our behavior so we don't offend them, because we are ignorant and bigoted and they invented Algebra in the 7th century.

The fact that France, India, China, Thailand, etc. have experienced violent clashes with their large minority Muslim populations shouldn't concern anyone.

Islam is a libertarian creed and those of us who believe the religion has strongly intolerant views on freedom of speech, freedom of dress, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, etc. are morons.

You're a liar.

 

[Sola_Fide]

There is no country where a muslim power is coercing Shari'a. But there are plenty of muislim countires whose populace we've mercilessly butchered to enforce democracy imperialism.

Well, I agree. Didn't you just read in my post where I said American imperialism is wrong and evil?



I am completely opposed to foreign intervention. Why paint me with that brush?


My only argument was a philosophical one about the foundations of law and individual liberty. And if you can't see that the concepts of Liberty are different from Locke to Muhammed, then I can't help you.

 

[Jace]

You're a liar.

It appears you are fighting a propaganda war for the continued transformation of this nation into a multicultural utopia.

The people you attack and criticize are Christians, while painting a rosy picture of Islam. Yet they want to move here and not the other way around.

Maybe this world would be more peaceful if they stayed over there and we stayed over here.

 

[CSJscience]

I don't think they'd be too happy living under the Mosaic law either. Have you ever read it? (Hint, it's in the Bible). Now ask yourself this question. Just how would "Sharia law" be implemented in the U.S.?

You bring up Mosaic Law. The difference is Mosaic Law is not being supported by large segments of Western Society and spread to Muslim countries through political activism and agitation.

It's not being advocated in Western countries like Sharia is in some Muslim majority countries. Even most hardcore church-going Christians (a small minority of the Western population) don't even know what Mosaic Law is.

Do I thin Sharia law will be imposed in the US? That's not the point. My point is that I'm opposed to Sharia law, and so should all libertarians.

I don't think Sharia law could be imposed any time soon in the US. But as in all politics, activists will work to have certain allowances and exemptions for Muslims.

However agitators are pressing in many countries throughout the world where it is likely to be imposed.

Top 10 Sharia recent headlines from *this week* only:

1. Pakistani government does deal with Taliban on sharia law
2. Rally for Sharia law in Somalia
3. Aceh's Sharia Law Still Controversial in Indonesia
4. Islamic bank injection to help Sharia-compliant products (FT Advisor)
5. Sharia rules makes Islam 'a laughing stock' Jakarta Post - ‎Aug 24, 2010‎
The sharia-based rules in Cianjur, supported by 35 Islamic organizations
6. Bid for Sharia Court in St. Petersburg Fails (The Moscow Times)
7. Young lovers killed by stoning in Afghanistan
Los Angeles Times - Laura King - ‎Aug 21, 2010‎
Even as hard-line village mullahs loosely aligned with the Taliban seek a return to the harshest forms of physical punishment permitted under Sharia, .
8. Al-Qaida in Yemen: Poverty, corruption and an army of jihadis willing to fight
The Guardian - ‎Aug 22, 2010‎
In 1994, he said, they had been given promises by President Ali Abdullah Saleh that he would implement sharia law and form an Islamic state, .
9. Kazakhstan bonds with Sharia-compliant finance
10. Malaysian civil servants evicted for 'immoral acts'
AsiaOne - ‎Aug 23, 2010‎

 

[LibertyVox]

Well, I agree. Didn't you just read in my post where I said American imperialism is wrong and evil?



I am completely opposed to foreign intervention. Why paint me with that brush?


My only argument was a philosophical one about the foundations of law and individual liberty. And if you can't see that the concepts of Liberty are different from Locke to Muhammed, then I can't help you.

Here's your comment:

But I also don't want to live under a tyranny like Sharia.

To which I wrote, there is no country where some "Islamic" power is coercing shairia. So what I meant by that was, you need not wory about that, nor any one else in this country. In fact, for citizens of a country who actually does what we make such a silly ruckus about, those are tall words.

And I don't need to compare Locke to Muhammad or Jesus. But rest assured, if Muslims would be libertarians they would use the same text and their prophet's own words to make that case. Just keep that in mind.

Oh and btw, when Locke was making a a case as to why the King should tolerate renegade christian secs he used the example of the "turbaned" nations saying that if they tolerate believers of different sects than why can't Britain.

Look, you can consider Islam in any which way you want, you can also choose not consider any alternative POV on the subject matter, but you have to agree that muslims are not some anathema to the country. Or some imminent existential threat. At least. That is if you're not startled by the every day language of retardese spoken so loudly on the air waves, tv, and by the politicos and the mob.

I mean I hope you agree with Ron Paul's somewhat strong language on the subject amid all this irrational hysteria.
And he didn't even need to do that. He is not Muslim, I doubt if Muslims are a big part of his constituency. In fact, almost any positive association with civil rights of citizens who are muslims can make one a pariah in the current atmosphere.

....actually I think he did need to say it. In many ways he is the last bullwark of civility in this country. The yard stick against which we compare others' conduct.
God aren't we lucky that such a man exists in the ruling elite?

 

[LibertyVox]

It appears you are fighting a propaganda war for the continued transformation of this nation into a multicultural utopia.

The people you attack and criticize are Christians, while painting a rosy picture of Islam. Yet they want to move here and not the other way around.

Maybe this world would be more peaceful if they stayed over there and we stayed over here.

You're a liar. And a very lousy one at that. Almost every one of your comments' subject matter directed at me is a lie. Every comment I've made here is preserved for others to read. I wonder why you're even on Ron Paul forums.
You'll fit in perfectly on basically any other forum. So much for your self styled politically incorrect cultural warriorhood.

 

[Matt Collins]

But I think any student of history needs to look at the foundations of law and culture in societies. It was Murray Rothbard who said it was Christianity (since the time of the Reformation) that put emphasis on the individual as opposed to the State. I think there is something about the foundations of Muslim theology and jurisprudence that is fundamentally against the concept of individual liberty and equal rights.

I agree with you.

The Muslim religion is incompatible with any other religion, or atheism. Violence is part of the religion. Heretics and apostates are to be killed.

Not that Muslims shouldn't have equal rights here and be free. But we will reach a tipping point sooner or later. We could put a stop to it if we just ended immigration, like we did in the 1920s when ethnic politics were at a boiling point. Immigration stopped and we had 40 years of assimiliation. I think now we need about a 100 year moratorium if we are to retain our American way of life.

This makes a great deal of sense to me.

 

[coastie]

The fact that France, India, China, Thailand, etc. have experienced violent clashes with their large minority Muslim populations shouldn't concern anyone.

And why, exactly, are they having "trouble" with these people??? Methinks you need to do some research on the matter, instead of insinuating that those governments are right and the Muslims there are wrong.

 

[Matt Collins]

They are not scared, they are willfully ignorant and bigoted.

I disagree. Very intelligent and well educated individuals I know personally are very scared of a Muslim / Sharia Law take over.... not in their lifetimes, but within the century.

It doesn't mean submission to government though. It means submission to the will of god. I don't see why that would have to conflict with libertarianism.

But isn't church and state a singular entity under Islam?

 

[Sola_Fide]

You see, the problem with people toady is that they have ALL been brainwashed by Statism.


I say sonething like "I am opposed to Islam as a philosophical system" and EVEN THE LIBERTARIANS HERE automatically think that I want that personal view imposed on everyone else. Uh, I don't. I believe in Liberty.



What a RIDICULOUS idea it is to think that a person who is critical of a philosophical system can't simultaneously love Liberty.



This cultural alliance that atheists have made with Islam is frankly one of the strangest things I've seen. It stems from a hatred of Christianity....lets just be honest about it.

 

[CSJscience]

It doesn't mean submission to government though. It means submission to the will of god. I don't see why that would have to conflict with libertarianism.

What is meant by "Submission" in the phrase "Submission to God" (the meaning of the word "Islam")?

Is "submission", say, sitting around thinking about God?
No.

Is "submission", say, lighting some hashish and seeing some visions and dressing up like a Jawa?
Probably not.

Is "submission" generally understood to mean chanting a few verses of the Quran for an hour?
Nope.

Well then, just what is meant by "Submission"

Answer:

In order to be submitting to the will of God, and being a good practicing Muslim, there are requirements for legal/political organization and legal/political action serving that purpose. These requirements are set forth in what is called "Sharia" or Islamic law.

So tobe clear, "Submission to God", the fundamental tenet of Islam, includes living according to Sharia.

Sharia includes functions of law and government as prescribed in the Quran and by Islamic religious scholars and traditions

That is what creates the conflict--

Islamic political action undertaken to extend anti-libertarian values as held by Sharia (Islamic) law would be in conflict with libertarianism.

And that's what I am addressing, and why I don't understand why Ron Paul supporters would support that kind of religious statism.