Burning Koran's? Why Not?

Dixie said:
I remember hoards of people vehemently correcting that assertion as it was made! I have never met anyone, or heard anyone, claim we are at war with "all muslims" ...again, I challenge you to show us the evidence of this? I know that was the CLAIM made by the left, I know pinhead liberals keep SAYING that's what others have claimed, but I am not seeing that here in the forums, on the national talk shows, in print media, or anywhere else, so where is it coming from, and who is saying that? I'll give you a hint, pinhead, NO ONE is saying that, and NO ONE has EVER said that! It's a wild accusation without ANY basis in truth or actuality, and is par for the course for liberal asswipes these days.
Click to expand...
Lib-tards are constantly misrepresenting the conservative position on this. :good4u:
 
signalmankenneth said:
burning-koran-florida.jpg
Click to expand...

128660447633304831.jpg
 
Damn Yankee said:
Lib-tards are constantly misrepresenting the conservative position on this. :good4u:
Click to expand...

The problem with stories like Jones proposed burning of Koran's is that the two opposing ends of the spectrum, with regards to a Christian perspective, are reproted on and not the actual and pervasive opinions of christiandom.

The vast majority of evangelical's hold this perspective.
 
RStringfield said:
Name one of those people. Who is arguing they should be prohibited from burning the Quran?
Click to expand...

Who was arguing they should be prohibited from building the mosque? Anyone vaguely familiar with the constitution, understands they have a right to build a mosque or burn qarans, that has not been in question.
 
Dixie said:
Not one person I heard, said that it "should be stopped" ...if you have those quotes, you can post them at any time! People said it should be protested, and if there was any legal means of prohibiting it, we should explore every avenue. All along the way, every single person I conversed with who was opposed to the mosque, admitted it was their constitutional right to build it.
Click to expand...

IDiot already told this lie. It has been established that there are those who would legally prohibit them from exercising their constitutional rights and you defended such actions.

You are a lying piece of shit. Out of one side of your mouth you claim everyone respects their rights and out of the other that we should ignore their rights.
 
Dixie said:
Who was arguing they should be prohibited from building the mosque? Anyone vaguely familiar with the constitution, understands they have a right to build a mosque or burn qarans, that has not been in question.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. You advocated and/or defended taking the mosque property via eminent domain.
 
RStringfield said:
Bullshit. You advocated and/or defended taking the mosque property via eminent domain.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! And if there is some legal means to prevent the church in Florida from burning qarans, I support that as well. There is nothing in that, which denies their rights, or prohibits their rights. You seem to think, just because they have the constitutional right, everyone must stand down and not protest it, and that isn't how it works in America. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean it's right.
 
Dixie said:
Absolutely! And if there is some legal means to prevent the church in Florida from burning qarans, I support that as well. There is nothing in that, which denies their rights, or prohibits their rights. You seem to think, just because they have the constitutional right, everyone must stand down and not protest it, and that isn't how it works in America. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean it's right.
Click to expand...

what could possibly withstand a plausible excuse of 'public use' to enable eminent domain to be used?

and again, if it's an actual right, then there is no frickin way it can be wrong.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Lib-tards are constantly misrepresenting the conservative position on this. :good4u:
Click to expand...

SM, you specifically said we are at war with Islam, and then defended your statement.

It is not "conservatives" I am saying made the statement. It is you.
 
Dixie said:
Absolutely! And if there is some legal means to prevent the church in Florida from burning qarans, I support that as well. There is nothing in that, which denies their rights, or prohibits their rights. You seem to think, just because they have the constitutional right, everyone must stand down and not protest it, and that isn't how it works in America. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean it's right.
Click to expand...

It would clearly not be legal to take the property for the Community Center via ID.

It would also not be legal for the government to do anything to censor the Church in Gainesville for the sole purpose of censorship.
 
Dixie said:
Absolutely! And if there is some legal means to prevent the church in Florida from burning qarans, I support that as well.
Click to expand...

In other words, YOU advocate violating/denying their constitutional rights.

There is nothing in that, which denies their rights, or prohibits their rights.
Click to expand...

Of course it does, retard.

You seem to think, just because they have the constitutional right, everyone must stand down and not protest it, and that isn't how it works in America. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean it's right.
Click to expand...

You have every right to protest. That has nothing to do with taking their property away or denying them the right to its use.
 
RStringfield said:
In other words, YOU advocate violating/denying their constitutional rights.

Of course it does, retard.

You have every right to protest. That has nothing to do with taking their property away or denying them the right to its use.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, Stringly... you're a pinhead. If our laws and courts operated according to your rather limited viewpoint, our country would be in one more fucked up mess, much worse than the fucked up mess it is currently in. Issues pertaining to "constitutional rights" are heard everyday, and decisions are rendered. If things were as you believe, we wouldn't have a need for a court to decide constitutionality of anything, people would just walk around with a constitution in their pocket, and whenever some issue of 'constitutional rights' came up, they would whip out their constitution, and show it to the other person, and say, See? I DO have this right! And that would be it... no court case needed, because it's right there in black and white. But here in the real world, things don't work that way. People's 'constitutional rights' very often overlap one another, and there becomes the question of who's 'constitutional rights' will prevail?

Throughout this entire debate, you have insisted that the Muslim group who wants to build this mosque, would have their 'constitutional rights' violated, if they are not allowed to do so, yet you have not offered the first bit of evidence to support that claim. You are aware, they do have to present the case to a court have that be the finding, before it can be stated unequivocally, right? The judge won't just pick up the case and say... Oh, these are the Muslims who wanted to build their mosque and had their constitutional rights violated by not being allowed to... this won't take long to rule on, I'll be able to get 9 holes in before lunch! That's just not how it would go down. A lawyer for the Plaintiff (the Muslims) specializing in Constitution Law would have to file a complaint, it would have to be made on merit, and meet the criteria of the court to hear such a case. Because of the fact that big cities, like New York City, have an abundance of lawyers on retainer, constantly examining policies and actions by the city, it's very highly unlikely the NYC would just blatantly do something in violation of someones constitutional rights. Therefore, any such claim of infringement would also be highly unlikely.

I have never advocated violating their constitutional rights, you keep assuming that to be the case, since I am protesting the building of the trophy mosque, and favor any LEGAL ACTION that would prevent it from being built. Excuse me if I am wrong, but I don't think most "LEGAL ACTIONS" violate fundamental constitutional rights, that would make the LAW unconstitutional!

LMAO@ "you have the right to protest!" Oh yeah? I have the right to protest, as long as I don't expect to obtain any possible results for the efforts? Is that what you're telling me? Or maybe it's... I have the right to protest, so long as I don't mind being called an intolerant religious bigot who wants to deny people the right to worship? Why would I protest, if any hope of resolve is impossible? It makes no sense to me.

We've been over eminent domain, and how it works. The state can take your private property, as long as you are compensated for it, and as long as their stated purpose is in state interest. They are NOT required to "prove" the state interest is "the real reason" or anything of the sort. Any evidence that it might not have been "the real reason" may be part of a civil suit at a later time, but would not be considered in an eminent domain hearing. The property owner would have to prove the stated 'state interest' was not a legitimate state interest. Again, I refer you to the number of lawyers and attorneys currently working for the City of New York. It's very unlikely a challenge could be made to a proper eminent domain taking by the state.

Let's be clear, I am not saying the state of New York will use eminent domain here, I get the feeling the city doesn't want to get involved with it, if they can help it. So it would really surprise me to see an ED implementation, in this particular case, but I do believe it is one legal way to prevent the mosque from being built there, and I would support such a maneuver.

By the same token, the state can also use their "police power" to regulate property, which is what they could implement in Florida for the koran burning. The morning of the scheduled burn, the fire marshal declares conditions unsafe for controlled burns, and suspends all permits for such activities....Sorry!
 
I can't tell; is Dixie still trying to argue that burning religious texts and building a community center are the exact same thing..almost impossible to distinguish because they are such identical activities in spirit & purpose?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top