So who's burning the Koran on the 11th?
- Thread starter mrdc
- Start date
S
smartorl
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/100#post_3307650
lol, but building a mosque at ground zero or ground zero is not?
Oh but there again our blessed media has slanted that as well. Stirring the pot always, sensationalizing and embellishing stories because once the outrage started alot of people's minds were not going to change because of a silly thing called "facts". Not saying at all that people don't have the right to be outraged because people are entitled to have an opinion regardless of the popularity or rationality of it. Having that building, center or mosque depending on who you believe was going to upset a portion of our population. Not unlike our country struggling over the status of Japanese Americans after WW2.
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/100#post_3307650
lol, but building a mosque at ground zero or ground zero is not?
Oh but there again our blessed media has slanted that as well. Stirring the pot always, sensationalizing and embellishing stories because once the outrage started alot of people's minds were not going to change because of a silly thing called "facts". Not saying at all that people don't have the right to be outraged because people are entitled to have an opinion regardless of the popularity or rationality of it. Having that building, center or mosque depending on who you believe was going to upset a portion of our population. Not unlike our country struggling over the status of Japanese Americans after WW2.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartorl http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/100#post_3307664
Not unlike our country struggling over the status of Japanese Americans after WW2.
the key difference is Japanese Americans apologized and went out of their way to become part of the country again....They denounced their home country....How many Islamists have you seen do that?
Originally Posted by smartorl http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/100#post_3307664
Not unlike our country struggling over the status of Japanese Americans after WW2.
the key difference is Japanese Americans apologized and went out of their way to become part of the country again....They denounced their home country....How many Islamists have you seen do that?
S
smartorl
Guest
From my personal experience only, my neighbors, which does show me that not all can be glumped in the group.
Do I think it's legal for them to build the mosque, yes. Do I think it is at best in very, very poor taste to do so, yes.
Bringing it closer to home, using the abortion clinic bombers that would say happen to be Baptist as an example. If they bombed a clinic, it would also be protested against a Baptist church being built close to the proximity of where the clinic stood. Not because all Baptists were responsible but because the bombers were Baptists and it would be inappropriate and it should be expected to cause problems.
I guess my main gripe here is the absolutes, to that I do object. Maybe it's because I'm a girl and we are a little more nurturing by nature. To condemn an entire religion based on the zealots is not fair. Does this religion lend itself to wackos, yes. But for every wacko there is also a nice, quiet, productive family trying to do the same thing we all are which is to survive.
I think the Rent a Preacher is just as guilty of being a zealot and causing problems as the zealots countering with threats of death. Both sides have jackasses.
The media is also spinning and causing alot of misinformation and causing both sides in all issues to draw the proverbial line in the sand. An example, two people who are amicable in a divorce being pitted against each other and going all out because of the fanning of unscrupulous divorce attorneys. No they had differences and disagreements that made them not want to be a couple, but could have remained respectful except for the devious means to make them adversaries.
Do I think it's legal for them to build the mosque, yes. Do I think it is at best in very, very poor taste to do so, yes.
Bringing it closer to home, using the abortion clinic bombers that would say happen to be Baptist as an example. If they bombed a clinic, it would also be protested against a Baptist church being built close to the proximity of where the clinic stood. Not because all Baptists were responsible but because the bombers were Baptists and it would be inappropriate and it should be expected to cause problems.
I guess my main gripe here is the absolutes, to that I do object. Maybe it's because I'm a girl and we are a little more nurturing by nature. To condemn an entire religion based on the zealots is not fair. Does this religion lend itself to wackos, yes. But for every wacko there is also a nice, quiet, productive family trying to do the same thing we all are which is to survive.
I think the Rent a Preacher is just as guilty of being a zealot and causing problems as the zealots countering with threats of death. Both sides have jackasses.
The media is also spinning and causing alot of misinformation and causing both sides in all issues to draw the proverbial line in the sand. An example, two people who are amicable in a divorce being pitted against each other and going all out because of the fanning of unscrupulous divorce attorneys. No they had differences and disagreements that made them not want to be a couple, but could have remained respectful except for the devious means to make them adversaries.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartorl http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307675
From my personal experience only, my neighbors, which does show me that not all can be glumped in the group.
Do I think it's legal for them to build the mosque, yes. Do I think it is at best in very, very poor taste to do so, yes.
Bringing it closer to home, using the abortion clinic bombers that would say happen to be Baptist as an example. If they bombed a clinic, it would also be protested against a Baptist church being built close to the proximity of where the clinic stood. Not because all Baptists were responsible but because the bombers were Baptists and it would be inappropriate and it should be expected to cause problems.
I guess my main gripe here is the absolutes, to that I do object. Maybe it's because I'm a girl and we are a little more nurturing by nature. To condemn an entire religion based on the zealots is not fair. Does this religion lend itself to wackos, yes. But for every wacko there is also a nice, quiet, productive family trying to do the same thing we all are which is to survive.
I think the Rent a Preacher is just as guilty of being a zealot and causing problems as the zealots countering with threats of death. Both sides have jackasses.
The media is also spinning and causing alot of misinformation and causing both sides in all issues to draw the proverbial line in the sand. An example, two people who are amicable in a divorce being pitted against each other and going all out because of the fanning of unscrupulous divorce attorneys. No they had differences and disagreements that made them not want to be a couple, but could have remained respectful except for the devious means to make them adversaries.
I agree with all of this.
but this has posed a question I feel needs debate.
Freedom of speech how far should it be protected. In a few instances we have cases where someone's "actions" shown as "speech" could bring great harm to a large majority of people....so in the interest of public safety they can be censored under law. Yet a print or news media outlet can report on the story regardless of public safety due to the results of the story....is this a double standard.
reefraff
Active Member
Depends on intent. Irresponsible actions or words that can be proven to be motivated by the desire to harm others is illegal. If this guy went to a Mosque to burn that book I think it would violate the law because he is going out of his way to cause a problem. Sorta like yelling fire in a theater and yelling fire standing in a park.
S
smartorl
Guest
You must be serious, no catchy signature line.
This is a hard point to ponder. Obviously laws are in place for situations like someone screaming fire in a theatre endangering patrons as mentioned before.
I think the media is acting like that screamer and has no repercussions.
This is a hard point to ponder. Obviously laws are in place for situations like someone screaming fire in a theatre endangering patrons as mentioned before.
I think the media is acting like that screamer and has no repercussions.
flower
Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307686
Freedom of speech how far should it be protected. In a few instances we have cases where someone's "actions" shown as "speech" could bring great harm to a large majority of people....so in the interest of public safety they can be censored under law. Yet a print or news media outlet can report on the story regardless of public safety due to the results of the story....is this a double standard.
You can sue the media for printing misinformation about you. If however the info is true...too bad. Insighting a riot is against the law, you do that by getting people all stirred up doing something that upsets allot of people, and for that you can get you arrested. These are not examples of free speech.
Burning another groups Holy books is not about freedom but about hate, it gets the people stirred up and insights a riot, to do a public stupid thing you have to get permission, like the Nazis marching down the street on Toughy ave where there are allot of Jewish people. The city charged the Nazis money to defray the cost to provide police protection in the event of a riot so they call that a legal assembly.
You can publically say you hate the Koran and don’t believe in its teaching s (in this country anyway) that is your right to free speech and about the limit of it.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307691
Depends on intent. Irresponsible actions or words that can be proven to be motivated by the desire to harm others is illegal. If this guy went to a Mosque to burn that book I think it would violate the law because he is going out of his way to cause a problem. Sorta like yelling fire in a theater and yelling fire standing in a park.
True, but this guy did not seek out a mosque, and the media by covering the story and his desire to go through with it, even after certain threats...shows a complete disregard of public safety on both accounts.....so my question is this, if there is a backlash were this to occur, would those journalists that continued reporting be put trial as this preacher might? what about his followers....
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307691
Depends on intent. Irresponsible actions or words that can be proven to be motivated by the desire to harm others is illegal. If this guy went to a Mosque to burn that book I think it would violate the law because he is going out of his way to cause a problem. Sorta like yelling fire in a theater and yelling fire standing in a park.
True, but this guy did not seek out a mosque, and the media by covering the story and his desire to go through with it, even after certain threats...shows a complete disregard of public safety on both accounts.....so my question is this, if there is a backlash were this to occur, would those journalists that continued reporting be put trial as this preacher might? what about his followers....
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307696
You can sue the media for printing misinformation about you. If however the info is true...too bad. Insighting a riot is against the law, you do that by getting people all stirred up doing something that upsets allot of people, and for that you can get you arrested. These are not examples of free speech.
Burning another groups Holy books is not about freedom but about hate, it gets the people stirred up and insights a riot, to do a public stupid thing you have to get permission, like the Nazis marching down the street on Toughy ave where there are allot of Jewish people. The city charged the Nazis money to defray the cost to provide police protection in the event of a riot so they call that a legal assembly.
You can publically say you hate the Koran and don’t believe in its teaching s (in this country anyway) that is your right to free speech and about the limit of it.
The law disagrees with you based off the previous legal actions concerning flag burning...How (in the eyes of the law) are flag burning any different than burning a Quran?
flower
Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307699
The law disagrees with you based off the previous legal actions concerning flag burning...How (in the eyes of the law) are flag burning any different than burning a Quran?
In the country where Islam is the religion, burning the Koran will get you hung in public. In our country, unless you are burning the flag because it is tattered and worn..you can not burn it in disrespect. To disrepect the flag, is to disrepect the United States of America and the people who have died defending it. It would insight a riot, which is against the law.
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307699
The law disagrees with you based off the previous legal actions concerning flag burning...How (in the eyes of the law) are flag burning any different than burning a Quran?
In the country where Islam is the religion, burning the Koran will get you hung in public. In our country, unless you are burning the flag because it is tattered and worn..you can not burn it in disrespect. To disrepect the flag, is to disrepect the United States of America and the people who have died defending it. It would insight a riot, which is against the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307704
In the country where Islam is the religion, burning the Koran will get you hung in public. In our country, unless you are burning the flag because it is tattered and worn..you can not burn it in disrespect. To disrepect the flag, is to disrepect the United States of America and the people who have died defending it. It would insight a riot, which is against the law.
It is most definitely NOT illegal to burn the US flag. Utterly disrespectful, yes, but illegal, no.
Originally Posted by Flower http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307704
In the country where Islam is the religion, burning the Koran will get you hung in public. In our country, unless you are burning the flag because it is tattered and worn..you can not burn it in disrespect. To disrepect the flag, is to disrepect the United States of America and the people who have died defending it. It would insight a riot, which is against the law.
It is most definitely NOT illegal to burn the US flag. Utterly disrespectful, yes, but illegal, no.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307704
In the country where Islam is the religion, burning the Koran will get you hung in public. In our country, unless you are burning the flag because it is tattered and worn..you can not burn it in disrespect. To disrepect the flag, is to disrepect the United States of America and the people who have died defending it. It would insight a riot, which is against the law.
Here you go.............
The first federal Flag Protection Act was passed by Congress in 1968 in response to protest burnings of the flag at demonstrations against the Vietnam War.[sup][10][/sup] Over time, 48 of the 50 U.S. states also enacted similar flag protection laws. All of these statutes were overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States by a 5-4 vote in the case Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) as unconstitutional restrictions of public expression.
After the Johnson decision, Congress quickly passed a new Flag Protection Act, which was also struck down by the Supreme Court the following year by the same 5-4 majority in the case United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990). The Court decided that expression through flag burning was constitutionally protected.
Originally Posted by Flower http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307704
In the country where Islam is the religion, burning the Koran will get you hung in public. In our country, unless you are burning the flag because it is tattered and worn..you can not burn it in disrespect. To disrepect the flag, is to disrepect the United States of America and the people who have died defending it. It would insight a riot, which is against the law.
Here you go.............
The first federal Flag Protection Act was passed by Congress in 1968 in response to protest burnings of the flag at demonstrations against the Vietnam War.[sup][10][/sup] Over time, 48 of the 50 U.S. states also enacted similar flag protection laws. All of these statutes were overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States by a 5-4 vote in the case Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) as unconstitutional restrictions of public expression.
After the Johnson decision, Congress quickly passed a new Flag Protection Act, which was also struck down by the Supreme Court the following year by the same 5-4 majority in the case United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990). The Court decided that expression through flag burning was constitutionally protected.
soviettaco
Active Member
Breaking news, the Florida pastor will not burn the Qurans on Saturday instead he will be meeting Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Supposedly the guy thinks he is going to get the Imam to move the cultural center. He said that he is sure it will indeed be moved. I don't really believe that the "cultural center" will be moved but that's good that he will not burn them.
flower
Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307722
Here you go.............
The first federal Flag Protection Act was passed by Congress in 1968 in response to protest burnings of the flag at demonstrations against the Vietnam War.[sup][10][/sup] Over time, 48 of the 50 U.S. states also enacted similar flag protection laws. All of these statutes were overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States by a 5-4 vote in the case Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) as unconstitutional restrictions of public expression.
After the Johnson decision, Congress quickly passed a new Flag Protection Act, which was also struck down by the Supreme Court the following year by the same 5-4 majority in the case United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990). The Court decided that expression through flag burning was constitutionally protected.
WOW...I was a little hippie girl and I didn't/wouldn't burn the flag, I really to this day thought it was against the law. In high school I wore one of those bands for MIA soldiers, we didn't remove it until he came home, and some of my friends still had it when I lost contact with them years ago...because the soldier never was found..Now you made me cry.
I don't have anything to do with politics...I wasn't involved with the demonstrations, I hated the war because it killed our young men..I never had anything but respect for the soldiers. The guys that went were not the same when they came home, my brother in law to this day can't talk about it..So as far as I'm concerned..it's against the law to burn the flag in disrespect.
I love our country, I think it's the very best place to live on planet Earth, but I also know it has allot of blood on its hands...I think that's true of every country.
soviettaco
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/100#post_3307670
the key difference is Japanese Americans apologized and went out of their way to become part of the country again....They denounced their home country....How many Islamists have you seen do that?
That doesn't even make sense. So a Russian Muslim is supposed to denounce being Russian even though they may already be a citizen of the US which defined by law means you do denounce being a Russian citizen? Plus what does citizenship have to do with this? If a Muslim denounces his former country (Spain for example, plus what if he was born in the US?) how does that change how you feel about them? What you really want them to do is denounce Islam, which is stupid. Another thing is you assume all Muslims in the U.S. are foreign which is terrible.
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/100#post_3307670
the key difference is Japanese Americans apologized and went out of their way to become part of the country again....They denounced their home country....How many Islamists have you seen do that?
That doesn't even make sense. So a Russian Muslim is supposed to denounce being Russian even though they may already be a citizen of the US which defined by law means you do denounce being a Russian citizen? Plus what does citizenship have to do with this? If a Muslim denounces his former country (Spain for example, plus what if he was born in the US?) how does that change how you feel about them? What you really want them to do is denounce Islam, which is stupid. Another thing is you assume all Muslims in the U.S. are foreign which is terrible.
soviettaco
Active Member
Question: How many of you think that there should a special place for Muslims to go in the U.S. or in this case NYC? Like should there be a Muslim district?
S
smartorl
Guest
I think I was the one who brought up the Japanese Americans and the struggles our country made internally with regard to their acceptance/rejection. It was more about how we came to view them as a group after the war than about the people themselves.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOVIETTACO http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307735
That doesn't even make sense. So a Russian Muslim is supposed to denounce being Russian even though they may already be a citizen of the US which defined by law means you do denounce being a Russian citizen? Plus what does citizenship have to do with this? If a Muslim denounces his former country (Spain for example, plus what if he was born in the US?) how does that change how you feel about them? What you really want them to do is denounce Islam, which is stupid. Another thing is you assume all Muslims in the U.S. are foreign which is terrible.
not at all what I am asking for..just showing the difference between the two. I am pointing very little was said by the muslim community after 9/11 and since...maybe..if there would have been a large group that did speak out against the attack things within country may not be at the head they are today....
darthtang aw
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOVIETTACO http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307738
Question: How many of you think that there should a special place for Muslims to go in the U.S. or in this case NYC? Like should there be a Muslim district?
no...dumb question.
Originally Posted by SOVIETTACO http:///forum/thread/380081/so-who-s-burning-the-koran-on-the-11th/120#post_3307738
Question: How many of you think that there should a special place for Muslims to go in the U.S. or in this case NYC? Like should there be a Muslim district?
no...dumb question.