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.
You think it would surprise people to learn that a people named after the Franks who live in a country named after the franks, are Germanic?
This is awesome. The goalposts have so far been moved from "Anglos" to "Germanic" and now to "Franks".
The Franks were Germanic, for sure. (You can even argue that they were Danes, if you were so inclined.) But the majority of the French aren't of Frank origin. Try Celtic and Roman.
You might as well argue that French is a Germanic language, what with it being named for the Franks.
Then cite one dammit. And answer the question I asked you. Where in the Constitution is the federal government given this authority?
What is that quote? Do not argue with stupid people for they will beat you with experience? Yeah- feels like it applies right now.
Your argument is that the SCOTUS has interpreted the constitution incorrectly. In defense of your position you've questioned how many times plenary powers may have been addressed meaning that the SCOTUS must not have really put serious thought into it....at least not as much thought as phantompilot City Data poster has. Because they must not have put that much thought into their position I am required to cite specific case opinions to refute city data poster.
I'll tag out here with the thought that this exchange just does nothing but reaffirm all of my preconceived notions about the overall stupidity of the average GOP voter. To prove to me you aren't stupid please look up cases in which immigration plenary powers precedent was set and show to me the flaw in logic that makes the SCOTUS' rulings erroneous. Thanks.
"The first evidence of Muslims contributing to the success of the Continental Army in America’s revolutionary war was the friendship made between George Washington and Sidi Muhammad bin Abdullah who was the Sultan of Morocco.
... Fighting on American soil, some of the Muslim names that appear in George Washington’s rosters include Benjamin Ishmael, Bampett Muhammad, who fought for the “Virgina Line,” and a man named Peter Buckminster who changed his name to Peter Salem and became a hero when he was able to kill British Major John Pitcairn at the Battle of Bunker Hill, and then later served as a commander at the Battles of Saratoga and Battle of Stoney Point. In addition, a man named Salem Poor was originally slave to a man named John Poor. He purchased his freedom in 1769 for 27 pounds, and shortly after left to join the Continental Army. He is best known for his service at Bunker Hill, and was recognized for his bravery at the General court of Massachusettes in 1775."
Two "muslim names" doesn't make them muslims. They're just a couple of mercenaries at most. And it certainly doesn't make them British subjects, or of any relevance.
It's the end of that religion's holy book. The Quran is Islam's holy book. But both those books are made up of scriptures. I can tell by the way people talk about them that most people haven't read the books themselves. They just repeat what they've heard over time. I can't see how anyone who spends time reading these books can come to a conclusion other than, "This is the same message." The Bible ends with Revelation because the Christians don't want you to know there's something beyond it. That would free your mind. Note: I am not bashing Christians. Most religions are limiting in this way. Religions are used to control people. One day, when another generation fashions the next religion out of the Dead Sea Scrolls (and Christianity and Islam are things of the past), we will be the "ancient civilization" referenced in that religious text, and those future people will believe we didn't exist and it is all myth. The cycle repeats.
Its pretty simple. Muhammad was not dumb. He stole the content of the bible, and placed himself inside the "koran". He basically infused religion into his totalitarian government structure of his and made himself the prophet . This insures that the followers are obedient and follow the will of the government, "because its gods will".....
Its pretty simple. Muhammad was not dumb. He stole the content of the bible, and placed himself inside the "koran". He basically infused religion into his totalitarian government structure of his and made himself the prophet . This insures that the followers are obedient and follow the will of the government, "because its gods will".....
do you see how simple that is?
Yeah islam took the worst and obsolete parts of the bible, demoted Jesus to a prophet and promoted a horrible person Muhammed as the head profit.
To call it a valid, bona fide religion would be like calling Hitlerism and Nazism a valid political belief.
Two "muslim names" doesn't make them muslims. They're just a couple of mercenaries at most. And it certainly doesn't make them British subjects, or of any relevance.
You do realize you are spinning madly.
What the heck are you talking about, "doesn't make them British subjects"?
They are relevant because your argument is that the founders didn't want to extend religious liberty to Muslims. Despite the FACT that we have quotes from them that shows they did in fact want to extend religious liberty, to Christians, Jews, Muslims, Deists. The founders included Muslims. The founders weren't as ignorant as you are claiming. There were Muslims in this country, and the founders were well aware of Islam. Their INTENTION was to extend religious liberty to the people living in this country.
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.
