Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL, I looked at that law one time with my paralegal wife, in order to pick it apart and see what it's all about... it's a joke. There's an exception that says anyone opposed to owning guns doesn't have to own one. It doesn't get any funnier than that!!
"You are required to own a gun here! Except for those of you who don't want to!"
It's not. My sister lived there and never owned one. It's not like they did spot checks. The main impetus was as a crime deterrent. A criminal was likely to think twice about breaking and entering if he thought there was a higher probability of a gun on the other side.
Yeah, I think this will ultimately be re-presented and overturned.
Many people I know in Kennesaw are embarrassed and disappointed by the council's decision and clear bigotry.
Kennesaw is almost 50% non-white. Many people are also not Christians.
Times are changing, whether the old guard likes it or not.
So, is this a racially tinged decision? Are the mosque's constituents mostly Black Muslims?
It's interesting how liberals on the one hand seem to despise religious Christians and mock and deride them regularly in public blogs and commentary. Yet, on the other hand, they jump reflexively to the defense of Muslims.
There are all sorts of examples in recent years of churches being denied a building permit in a neighborhood where residents don't want the traffic and noise and, obviously, don't believe in the Scripture. There was a rather famous incident a few years ago about how a California city banned Christian prayer gatherings in private homes through use of some vague ordinance.
But, ye gods, if you dare to oppose a mosque (however anti-First Amendment such opposition may be) then they come out in droves to support the mosques.
By the way, would this mosque in Kennesaw be tolerant toward homosexuals? Homosexuality is a sin punishable by death, according to the literal letter of Koranic teachings. In Saudi Arabia, for example, it's a capital offense. Even in the Palestinian occupied territories, gays regularly seek asylum inside Israel.
So, is this a racially tinged decision? Are the mosque's constituents mostly Black Muslims?
It's interesting how conservatives on the one hand seem to despise religious Muslims and mock and deride them regularly in public blogs and commentary. Yet, on the other hand, they jump reflexively to the defense of Christians.
There, I fixed that for you. However, I disagree with even my own statement, because that generalizes one statement and what we see on the news to a whole group of people, which is wrong. I doubt all Christians feel that way, just like not all Muslims are extremists, etc.
[/quote]But, ye gods, if you dare to oppose a mosque (however anti-First Amendment such opposition may be) then they come out in droves to support the mosques.
By the way, would this mosque in Kennesaw be tolerant toward homosexuals? Homosexuality is a sin punishable by death, according to the literal letter of Koranic teachings. In Saudi Arabia, for example, it's a capital offense. Even in the Palestinian occupied territories, gays regularly seek asylum inside Israel.
Come on, liberals. Explain your reasoning.[/quote]
I'm for religious freedom. I'm for Christians, Muslims, and whoever else worshipping in a place they are legally allowed to do so, which in this case they weren't legally allowed to do so blatantly because they are Muslim, which is against the law. In this instance, in Kennesaw, the city council purposefully and knowingly discriminated against a group of people because of their religion. That is wrong, and I'm not sure how anybody can defend them for that.
If in that church, mosque, or whatever, they want to say that homosexuality is a sin, all the power to them. They can be as ignorant as they want in the name of their God (even if they are being hypocrites at the same time). However, the second they try to impose that belief on anybody else through a law, I have a problem with it. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, regardless of how bigoted or ignorant I think it may be. I just won't be friends with you. But if you act on that opinion in a way that harms another person, or if you try to enact a law preventing somebody from living an equal life because of their race, sex, or whatever, then there is a major problem. That is against human rights, it creates an unequal society, and it is against our Constitution. If we were going to live like that, we would live in a dictatorship where the beliefs of one person can be the rule of law.
There, I fixed that for you. However, I disagree with even my own statement, because that generalizes one statement and what we see on the news to a whole group of people, which is wrong. I doubt all Christians feel that way, just like not all Muslims are extremists, etc.
I'm for religious freedom. I'm for Christians, Muslims, and whoever else worshipping in a place they are legally allowed to do so, which in this case they weren't legally allowed to do so blatantly because they are Muslim, which is against the law. In this instance, in Kennesaw, the city council purposefully and knowingly discriminated against a group of people because of their religion. That is wrong, and I'm not sure how anybody can defend them for that.
If in that church, mosque, or whatever, they want to say that homosexuality is a sin, all the power to them. They can be as ignorant as they want in the name of their God (even if they are being hypocrites at the same time). However, the second they try to impose that belief on anybody else through a law, I have a problem with it. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, regardless of how bigoted or ignorant I think it may be. I just won't be friends with you. But if you act on that opinion in a way that harms another person, or if you try to enact a law preventing somebody from living an equal life because of their race, sex, or whatever, then there is a major problem. That is against human rights, it creates an unequal society, and it is against our Constitution. If we were going to live like that, we would live in a dictatorship where the beliefs of one person can be the rule of law.
Is that explanation enough for you?
This isn't about religious freedom; it's about zoning. No one's saying that people can't practice the Muslim religion. However, there are some liberals who oppose the practice of Christianity, i.e. the example of that town in California, which you failed to address.
This isn't about what CCATL believes or does. This is about what a majority of liberals believe and do, and how they vote. There is a clear trend in the U.S. to discriminate against Christians, while reflexively supporting Islam. If you don't defend that stance, then instead of "fixing" what I wrote, why not support what I wrote, which is in essence a defense of tolerance.
But since your posting was all about yourself, then let's talk about you. Suppose a mosque proposes to open next door to your house (presumably in Atlanta). You're OK with that, right?
Then, suppose that inside the mosque, they are preaching against homosexuality, they are discussing how Jews run the country and cause undue support for Israel. You're still OK with that?
Suppose the mosque refuses to let a gay man worship. They make him leave. You are still tolerant toward this group?
Next, suppose the mosque preaches to its congregation that America deserved 9/11, that it brought 9/11 on itself, and that the war on terrorism is misdirected. Suppose they say that ISIS is a good thing. Are you still tolerant toward them?
At what point does tolerance become bending down and supplicating yourself? That's all I'm asking. There's some tolerant, liberal Muslims in the world, but there are a lot, probably a majority, who are not very tolerant.
Kennesaw is going to lose this battle and in truth, they likely are on the wrong side of the law . . . provided there is no zoning-specific reason for denial that would also be true for Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, or Jews as well.
That being said, the liberal hypocrisy on any muslim issue is just laughable for many reasons already mentioned in this thread.
Gay muslim = death penalty
Woman fights back against rapist = stoned or hanged in public
Woman caught in adultery = stoned or hanged in public
Be a Christian in muslim nation = death penalty
And the one the takes the cake . . . no other religion in the world encourages and celebrates publicly "in the name of Allah" the beheading, death, and slaughter of innocent people.
Granted none of that has happened in Kennesaw, but I assure you that the above reasons are 100% why the mosque was denied. A Buddhist or Hindu temple or Jewish synagogue would have been easily approved.
Kennesaw is going to lose this battle and in truth, they likely are on the wrong side of the law . . . provided there is no zoning-specific reason for denial that would also be true for Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, or Jews as well.
That being said, the liberal hypocrisy on any muslim issue is just laughable for many reasons already mentioned in this thread.
Gay muslim = death penalty
Woman fights back against rapist = stoned or hanged in public
Woman caught in adultery = stoned or hanged in public
Be a Christian in muslim nation = death penalty
And the one the takes the cake . . . no other religion in the world encourages and celebrates publicly "in the name of Allah" the beheading, death, and slaughter of innocent people.
Granted none of that has happened in Kennesaw, but I assure you that the above reasons are 100% why the mosque was denied. A Buddhist or Hindu temple or Jewish synagogue would have been easily approved.
My friend your arguments paint all muslims with a broad stroke. Simply put, there are 1.5 billion muslims and certainly their are some bad apples. However, these not all muslims seem to have an agenda towards the barbaric acts committed by muslims in say tribal Pakistan, or our "allies" in Saudi Arabia. You know there are secular Muslim Countries.. Like 200mm Muslims in Indonesia or 75 Million Muslims in Turkey, and let's not forget Iraq was a secular muslim nation until our intervention. Saddam absolutely hated the extremists groups like Al Qaeda.
Simply put when identifying problems, look for the specifics, it seems Christians Nations have progressed from killing in the name of Jesus and now kill in the name of Democracy and Capitalism. Same broad stroke...
Kennesaw is going to lose this battle and in truth, they likely are on the wrong side of the law . . . provided there is no zoning-specific reason for denial that would also be true for Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, or Jews as well.
That being said, the liberal hypocrisy on any muslim issue is just laughable for many reasons already mentioned in this thread.
Gay muslim = death penalty
Woman fights back against rapist = stoned or hanged in public
Woman caught in adultery = stoned or hanged in public
Be a Christian in muslim nation = death penalty
And the one the takes the cake . . . no other religion in the world encourages and celebrates publicly "in the name of Allah" the beheading, death, and slaughter of innocent people.
Granted none of that has happened in Kennesaw, but I assure you that the above reasons are 100% why the mosque was denied. A Buddhist or Hindu temple or Jewish synagogue would have been easily approved.
You forgot:
Convert away from Islam = death penalty.
And yes, onemanarmy, 1.5 billion Muslims are pretty much on the same page. Do you have any evidence other than a "feeling" that it's OK to convert away from Islam? Go to Pakistan (pop. 200 million) or Islamic parts of India (roughly 200 million) or anywhere in the Middle East (pop 422 million) and you will find similar practices pretty much throughout.
I do agree that that mosque should have the right to build where it wants.
And yes, onemanarmy, 1.5 billion Muslims are pretty much on the same page. Do you have any evidence other than a "feeling" that it's OK to convert away from Islam? Go to Pakistan (pop. 200 million) or Islamic parts of India (roughly 200 million) or anywhere in the Middle East (pop 422 million) and you will find similar practices pretty much throughout.
I do agree that that mosque should have the right to build where it wants.
I find it ironic that your are asking me to provide evidence, when you start with that "1.5 muslims are pretty much on the same page" I do know that Muslims in the USA, can convert to any religion they want without fear of the death penalty.
Status:
"Pickleball-Free American"
(set 5 days ago)
Location: St Simons Island, GA
23,466 posts, read 44,100,317 times
Reputation: 16861
Quote:
Originally Posted by onemanarmy
Which turns out to be factually incorrect.
Oh, I forgot. You know everything.
What other possible rationale could there be for such a specious law?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
