Newman
New member
Yes. Are you familiar with the term "red herring"?
"In essence" = "Let me introduce my own bias into history"
I'll take that as a concession that freedom of religion is a conservative position. Do you disagree?
Do some Republican candidates need to drop out?
- Thread starter lighthouse99
- Start date
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Are you familiar with the word "theocracy"?
Then you'd know that the words "Islam" and "theocracy" go hand in hand.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Wrong again. As the article on Jefferson stated: "In essence, the Ambassador from Tripoli stated that their religion, Islam, gave them the right to kidnap and murder and enslave those who held different beliefs."
It's all in the Qur'an.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
LOL...Libertarians.
That would be a Libertarian position (all religions are the same). Islam isn't a religion, it's a cult that worships amongst other things a pedophile false prophet and murders those who don't embrace it's false doctrine.
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Are you familiar with the word "theocracy"?
Then you'd know that the words "Islam" and "theocracy" go hand in hand.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Wrong again. As the article on Jefferson stated: "In essence, the Ambassador from Tripoli stated that their religion, Islam, gave them the right to kidnap and murder and enslave those who held different beliefs."
It's all in the Qur'an.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
LOL...Libertarians.
That would be a Libertarian position (all religions are the same). Islam isn't a religion, it's a cult that worships amongst other things a pedophile false prophet and murders those who don't embrace it's false doctrine.
Newman
New member
Apparently you are just as much of a theocrat if you don't acknowledge freedom of religion.
Acknowledging the freedom that people have to worship/believe what/who they want the way they want to is different than saying all religions are the same. People aren't criminals for believing something, they are criminals when they commit crimes.
Just because we know something to be false doesn't mean we should outlaw people believing that false thing. Christians are called to preach the Gospel, not put people in jail or kill people for not believing it.
The question we are discussing, however, is freedom of religion and non-interventionist foreign policy whether or not these are conservative values. None of what you have offered touches on this at all, but is just your usual M.O. of following irrelevant lines.
I don't even have any skin in this game, but I do think that both of those are conservative positions. What is conservatism to you? Christian theocratic empire instead of Islamic theocratic empire?
WizardofOz
New member
I guess we all now know what TruthSetsFree's next reincarnation will be named...
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Then you'd know that the words "Islam" and "theocracy" go hand in hand.
There is no "freedom" when it comes to Islam. On that note: I've stated for quite sometime now that secular humanists and their Libertarian allies just love Islam. I'm convinced that it's their HATRED of Judeo/Christian doctrine that bonds them so closely.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
That would be a Libertarian position (all religions are the same). Islam isn't a religion, it's a cult that worships amongst other things a pedophile false prophet and murders those who don't embrace it's false doctrine.
While you as a Libertarian don't physically "commit" crimes, you promote them through legislation. Islam is the same way with the Qu'ran, i.e. through their hateful and extremely violent doctrine.
You might want to take up the subject of jail and murdering people with Christians in Muslim countries, as they know firsthand what that is like.
I've pointed out that Islam is not a religion, but a extremely hateful and violent cult. As far as "non-interventionist foreign policy":
I marvel how you Libertarians think that Islam hates Jews and Christians (and other religions as well) because we set foot on their soil. Islam has a long history of aggression and it comes from their Qu'ran.
The basis of conservatism comes from a book that you really should pick up and read:
The Holy Bible.
Then you'd know that the words "Islam" and "theocracy" go hand in hand.
There is no "freedom" when it comes to Islam. On that note: I've stated for quite sometime now that secular humanists and their Libertarian allies just love Islam. I'm convinced that it's their HATRED of Judeo/Christian doctrine that bonds them so closely.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
That would be a Libertarian position (all religions are the same). Islam isn't a religion, it's a cult that worships amongst other things a pedophile false prophet and murders those who don't embrace it's false doctrine.
While you as a Libertarian don't physically "commit" crimes, you promote them through legislation. Islam is the same way with the Qu'ran, i.e. through their hateful and extremely violent doctrine.
You might want to take up the subject of jail and murdering people with Christians in Muslim countries, as they know firsthand what that is like.
I've pointed out that Islam is not a religion, but a extremely hateful and violent cult. As far as "non-interventionist foreign policy":
I marvel how you Libertarians think that Islam hates Jews and Christians (and other religions as well) because we set foot on their soil. Islam has a long history of aggression and it comes from their Qu'ran.
The basis of conservatism comes from a book that you really should pick up and read:
The Holy Bible.
Can we all agree that Jeb Bush should have dropped out months ago??
I'll take it step further: All RINO's should have dropped out months ago.
Newman
New member
You've intentionally used "freedom" with a different definition than the one we're currently discussing. I think you understand that you are wrong here and so you keep throwing out red herrings.
Hmm... more irrelevant provocation. aCW's non-stop M.O.
You've got nothing else? No real arguments? Nothing to add?
More deflection because you can't support your position. But we're not talking about that are we?
Irrelevant. Deflection. Provocation. You literally have nothing to support your argument.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that part where Jesus calls the cops on the Gentiles for being Gentiles. Or when Paul put people in jail for not believing in the resurrected Christ. Or that part where Jesus amassed an army to invade another country because they weren't Christian.
How in the world do you get an interventionist foreign policy and violently enforcing Christianity on people from the Bible? Parading around the world looking for converts at the point of a gun or a sword sounds more like Islam than Biblical Christianity to me. Are you sure you aren't Muslim? You're definitely not conservative, in any sense of the word.
lighthouse99
New member
lighthouse99
New member
i have read his biog
he stands up to the corruption in Washington like no one else does
that is true courage
Boehner admitted some time back, apparently without any sense of shame, that--well, i can't recall the exact words but this is my take on what he said: That he liked the big social club known as Washington
Cruz LOATHES that kind of thing
he is a true hero
:upright:
:tunes:
lighthouse99
New member
I want to see the fireworks when Trump and Hillary go at each other.
is that good reason to to support Trump?
lighthouse99
New member
no, it is not
it started out as one but its leader (AD 630-ish) ditched religion for political power (etc) and started using force to DOMINATE and rule & expand wherever he (they) could
people need to learn history
They call it a religion the same way the Mormons use religion, as a cloak to commit immorality, but @ least the Mormons gave up polygamy rather than be on the outs w/ US govt
++
lighthouse99
New member
i think all but Cruz, Huckabee, Fiorina and Paul should drop out
But it would be nice if we gathered around ONE candidate
Then T would not be
(broken record)
I'm at the top of the polls
I am leading in the polls
no one is better than me
ISIL fears me [and no one else]
blah blah tiresome blah
Also, I mistakenly thought it was Cruz calling for a 34 nation ban on immigrants, but i believe that was Paul's idea
I like Rand Paul. He is a bit dovish, but other than that i like him
:luigi:
lighthouse99
New member
all Republican candidates took an oath not to go 3rd party
If any of them does, you know what kind of president he/she will be: just like the one we have:shocked:, won't keep promises:shocked:
("If you like your plan, you can keep it" / "This will be the most transparent Administration" etc etc)
Is that the kind of president you want? Would you marry a liar? someone who cheats? Then don't elect someone who would do that, who would put self over the nation
:FrankiE:
:shocked:
If any of them does, you know what kind of president he/she will be: just like the one we have:shocked:, won't keep promises:shocked:
("If you like your plan, you can keep it" / "This will be the most transparent Administration" etc etc)
Is that the kind of president you want? Would you marry a liar? someone who cheats? Then don't elect someone who would do that, who would put self over the nation
:FrankiE:
:shocked:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
lighthouse99
New member
well, if i were to chose just one, he would be it. But if we could all just rally around one nominee or two, at least he wouldn't be Numero Uno anymore, which of course, he isn't because he doesn't have the support of about 65% of Republicans, but you know what i mean
:think:
Conventional wisdom would suggest that Trump won't last until the Republican Convention if he continues making the kinds of political announcements he has made in the past.
Most of the presidential wannabees are simply biding their time, hoping that Trump will self-destruct and wait till the dust settles before making any final decisions.
Its doubtful that with this many candidates, Trump can achieve a majority and in the worst case scenario, they would all throw their support behind one candidate to block him at the GOP Convention.
Most of the presidential wannabees are simply biding their time, hoping that Trump will self-destruct and wait till the dust settles before making any final decisions.
Its doubtful that with this many candidates, Trump can achieve a majority and in the worst case scenario, they would all throw their support behind one candidate to block him at the GOP Convention.
Newman
New member
this is th strangest thing I hv heard today
Which part is confusing to you? That Reagan doesn't represent real conservatism? Or that non-interventionism is a real conservative value?
Newman
New member
Islam does not have a king, president, national borders, a constitution, a parliament, or an army. It has none of the features we associate with modern nation states, except that it is made up of people.
It does have a system of doctrine, claims about the supernatural, converts, holidays celebrated by followers worldwide, etc. It has all of the features we associate with modern religions.
This is exactly my thought when I read the title.