Dear Eric, Their Religion is their Jihad beliefs. They know how we feel and in reference to freedom of religion. They are using it to put their Jihad Government in the midst of us. How can I explain how dangerous and deceitful they are. Their religion is jihad. I cannot accept this, Eric. I will continue agruing, because I feel that the evilness of their government and religion does not come under tolerance for other religions. I am not tolerant of Jihad. I know you are not. Correlate this for yourself. They are to use deceit and use our ideas for them to infiltate us and take us over from within and without. Then you will become Muslim. No way around it. As a Christian I cannot do this. I am so sorry we disagree, but I know that the Missouri Liberty Coalition had studied this. Have you read the Que'ran or the parts that indicate deceit and war to convert and govern all the earth? Philosopher Karl Popper did not know about Jihad apparently. I agree with tolerance for religion more than any body I know. I am tolerant to Athiests. Athiests are not told by their government and/or religion to conquer the whole world by violence and lies and deceit. This is not about freedom of religion and I would hope Mr. Popper could see this. If he is intelligent and knows what Jihad is, I could think he could see a special instance in this matter. I am firm in my tolerance. I am not, however, tolerant of Sharia.
Blessings, Linda Herd ________________________________ From: Eric Vought <evou...@pobox.com> To: missourilibertycoalition@googlegroups.com Sent: Wed, September 8, 2010 8:34:29 AM Subject: Re: [MoLiCo] Fw: Say No to the Islamic "Victory" Mosque at Ground Zero On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Jerry Blevins wrote: > Thank you to Ideology of Islam for this post. > > Philosopher Karl Popper had these wise words: > > "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we > extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not > prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the > intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed and tolerance with them. ... > We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to > tolerate the intolerant." > ________________________________________ > > Thomas Mann said: "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." > ________________________________________ > > The doctrines of Islam, formalized in the sacred Islamic law of Sharia, are > the greatest source of religious bigotry, intolerance, hatred and violence > in the world today. Anyone who supports religious freedom and tolerance > should be taking a strong stand against Sharia law. Anyone who does not > take a strong stand against Sharia law becomes an accessory to Islamic > bigotry and intolerance. > > Ron Silverman, Chapter Leader > South Bend, IN > ACT! for America > E-Mail: act4...@att.net You also have still not answered the most important question. Even, assuming for the sake of argument you were right on all else, "How would you change the law to oppose this mosque and not have that law misused against everyone else?" Show me *wording* of such a change. How are you going to get around the First Amendment and the common law Right to Contract (and the Due Process clause and the Immunities and Privileges clause...) to prevent someone from building a religious center on private land short conviction for an actual crime? And, if you had a conviction for an actual crime, why would that not suffice in the matter? Your argument is self-conflicting and insupportable EVEN if all the facts you allege are correct. The bare fact is that this mosque construction was *exactly* what the Founders sought to protect at the founding of our nation (yes, there were, in fact, Muslims in the US at the time and certainly Christian sects who were subject to religious intolerance) and was quite clearly the explicit purpose of the 14th Amendment (many ex-slaves were Muslim). The rest of what you accuse Muslims has nothing whatsoever to do with this construction. If any of it were more than vague accusations: if the guy were a criminal, if the money was crooked, if the city council was bribed, if they were training commandos, if he had a direct connection to 9/11, etc., etc., then opposition to the mosque itself would not be necessary, One could simply oppose the crimes. And, if you show me *another* mosque training commandos or stewing children, then that *still* is not enough in this case. Arrest *them*; It is still neither legal nor moral to oppose *this* project or any other religious construction on the basis that you are afraid of an entire, vaguely-defined class of people, just as it is illegal and immoral to shut down all churches because of priest-pedophiles elsewhere. So, let me be blunt for my part: to the extent that any opposition to this construction is not based on a crime in fact, I DO call it bigotry and intolerance. What is more, I call it illegal, un-American, un-Christian and evil. Sincerely, Eric Vought "Faith does not absolve us from trying to understand our world and make moral distinctions with the eyes and brain given us. Religion is as much responsibility as direction: Duty not Distinction." --This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members. If you do not like what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave. If you leave, learn how to do this for yourself. If you do not, you will be here forever. -- This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members. If you do not like what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave. If you leave, learn how to do this for yourself. If you do not, you will be here forever.
