View Poll Results: Should HR5824 be made law ?

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    2 20.00%
  • No

    8 80.00%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51
Thanks Tree45Thanks

Thread: Should HR5824 Be Made Law ?

  1. #21
    Veteran Member DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    31,622
    Thanks
    26697

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by Snikitz View Post
    Absolutely.

    The U.S. Routinely penalizes nations with poor human rights records or that is involved in active oppression of minority groups.
    This law does not punish foreign states. It was written to discourage Mosque building in the US. Plain and simple.

    Human rights violations are subjective. What ever standard the law would use to make that determination, not many countries would be free of that determination....not even the US.

    Of course Argentina or Finland are not to worry, they are building Mosques in the US.
    Thanks from Friday13

  2. #22
    Polemicist Supremum Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,719
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Yesod

    Invoking Self Defense

    " Invoking Self Defense "

    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    "Redundant use of quotation marks"
    *My eyes hurt from reading this crap*
    You're dead wrong, let the people make up their minds of what they want -- quit telling me what I can do, I'm a big boy, I'll decide. Freedom of religion is a guaranteed right. Don't mess with it. The Constitution is fine just how it is.
    * Informed Consent *

    Freedom of religion is one thing , violations of non aggression principles is another .

    The qurayn does not apply outside of hejaz and any pretense that it does also includes the filth to implement its poo finger states through violence .

    So see surah 9 and surah 47 , at least , that is , assuming it does not hurt your eyes to read the crap .

    In fact , hand over the microphone , step aside from the public stage and prepare for reality ; however , they are not that brave .

    Fact is , a fictional ishmaelism i slam ideology has zero intention for anything other than usurping the constitution by applying representative democracy to institute its debase nomian legalism through tyranny by majority that would intend violations of non aggression principles .
    Last edited by Monk-Eye; 2nd January 2017 at 12:39 PM.

  3. #23
    Polemicist Supremum Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,719
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Yesod

    Defending The Indefensible

    " Defending The Indefensible "

    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    This law does not punish foreign states. It was written to discourage Mosque building in the US. Plain and simple.
    * Good Riddance *

    It seems the deluded recognize a nazi by their jack boots , goose steps , silly salutes , swastikas and mein kempf , while also recognizing a kkk by their white hoods and cross burning , but cannot recognize a similar class of supremacist bigots , sporting desert garb and sermons founding a militant manifesto ; in fact , the deluded fail to evaluate or even recognize incriminating evidence from a 1400 year history of murder and genocide by doctrine .

    The deluded can only recognize some ideologies for their moral intolerance , but cannot identity an ideology that relegates non believers as inferior , as third class subjects , as dim wits ( dhimmi ) , as deserving a status of a protected ignoramus , to be impugned and derided by government until they adapt and adopt to its nomian psychosis .

    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    Human rights violations are subjective. What ever standard the law would use to make that determination, not many countries would be free of that determination....not even the US.
    * Moral Relativism *

    " Human wrights violations are subjective. " is a comical statement , because a wright exists only because a greater individual is able to reprise , or to issue a retort , for violating the statutes .

    Simple fact is , any adherent of non aggression principles is entitled to invoke self defense for excluding the fictional ishmaelism i slam adherent and its pretentious , pompous , pious , nomian , hubris .

    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    Of course Argentina or Finland are not to worry, they are building Mosques in the US.
    * Plethora of Self Ignorant Dolts *

    The fact that they may be doing so , only reveals their lack of informed consent and blatant , profound , externally and internally imposed ignorance .
    Last edited by Monk-Eye; 3rd January 2017 at 06:57 PM.

  4. #24
    Polemicist Supremum Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,719
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Yesod

    Simple Pie Man

    " Simple Pie Man "

    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    "Redundant use of quotation marks"
    * Additional Data Limited Option *

    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    *My eyes hurt from reading this crap*
    * It Is Regular Regulated Shift Fest *

    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    You're dead wrong, let the people make up their minds of what they want -- quit telling me what I can do, I'm a big boy, I'll decide. Freedom of religion is a guaranteed right. Don't mess with it. The Constitution is fine just how it is.
    * Such Hisses Through *

    Whom or who is modifying constitutions founded upon amendments applying terms defining negative wrights provisioning negative liberties ?

    Who or whom is expecting to pass course final exams without being able to discriminate between successful and unsuccessful answers ?

  5. #25
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,335
    Thanks
    9272

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk-Eye View Post
    " Defending The Indefensible "

    * Good Riddance *

    It seems the deluded recognize a nazi by their jack boots , goose steps , silly salutes , swastikas and mein kempf , while also recognizing a kkk by their white hoods and cross burning , but cannot recognize a similar class of supremacist bigots , sporting desert garb and sermons founding a militant manifesto ; in fact , the deluded fail to evaluate or even recognize incriminating evidence from a 1400 year history of murder and genocide by doctrine .

    The deluded can only recognize some ideologies for their moral intolerance , but cannot identity an ideology that relegates non believers as inferior , as third class subjects , as dim wits ( dhimmi ) , as deserving a status of a protected ignoramus , to be impugned and derided by government until they adapt and adopt to its nomian psychosis .

    ....
    And yet, Neo-Nazi and Klan marches are still allowed in the US. They are still allowed to hand out literature, quote the Bible if they want, whatever. I don't like that these marches happen, and I certainly wouldn't attend for any reason other than to heckle and sneer at them. At the same time, I really don't want the government to dole out approval slips for people who are "allowed" to make appeals to the public, and "denials" for people on the government's naughty list. Care to explain what this analogy was supposed to show?

    Secondly, it seems like this kind of law seeks to punish people who escaped such brutal societies. Shouldn't we shift the focus onto the governments responsible, and not the people who leave their grasp?
    Thanks from Friday13

  6. #26
    Polemicist Supremum Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,719
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Yesod

    Agonists Inviting More Trouble Calling It Equitable

    " Agonists Inviting More Trouble Calling It Equitable "

    * Extending Membership Conditioned On Common Creed *
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    And yet, Neo-Nazi and Klan marches are still allowed in the US. They are still allowed to hand out literature, quote the Bible if they want, whatever. I don't like that these marches happen, and I certainly wouldn't attend for any reason other than to heckle and sneer at them. At the same time, I really don't want the government to dole out approval slips for people who are "allowed" to make appeals to the public, and "denials" for people on the government's naughty list. Care to explain what this analogy was supposed to show?
    Secondly, it seems like this kind of law seeks to punish people who escaped such brutal societies. Shouldn't we shift the focus onto the governments responsible, and not the people who leave their grasp?
    Are those marchers amassing as a growing population with elevated birth rates and at some percentage of the 1.2 million permanent immigrants to the US alone each year ?

    In general , are those marchers growing in political and social affluence backed by a massive propaganda campaign for their acceptance ?

    Or are those marchers generally shunned and rebuked as hostile to individual liberty ?

    Somehow it has been overlooked that governments of fictional ishmaelism i slam are designed and elected by its peoples who are only fleeing to escape the conflicts and who believe that their caustic beliefs provide valid standards for public policy rather than generally causing social afflictions for themselves and for others .
    Last edited by Monk-Eye; 6th January 2017 at 04:53 PM.

  7. #27
    Member a777pilot's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,629
    Thanks
    130

    From
    Flower Mound, TX (In the basement)
    In a word, YES! Pass this Bill.

  8. #28
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,335
    Thanks
    9272

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by a777pilot View Post
    In a word, YES! Pass this Bill.
    Why?
    Thanks from Friday13

  9. #29
    Polemicist Supremum Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,719
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Yesod

    Importing Mental Psychosis

    " Importing Mental Psychosis "

    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    Why?
    * Why Knot *

    How much affluence or influence should foreign potentates have within the united states ?

    Of course as long as political candidates do not directly receive campaign contributions from foreign potentates , which is illegal , is it okay to allow the chinese government to financially promote communist propaganda or its political organizers ?

    Who runs our mosques?
    According to a database of British Islam, however, only two out of 1,700 mosques in Britain follow modernist interpretations of the Koran. It’s not the same elsewhere in the West. In a 2011 survey of Islam in the United States, 56 per cent of mosques described themselves as following an interpretation of Islam adapted to modern circumstances. This has not happened in Britain.

    So which Islamic schools of thought run Britain’s mosques today? The influence of Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi movement is often cited. But the Wahhabis — or Salafis as they prefer to be called — control just 6 per cent of mosques.

    The largest single group — the one which arguably gives Islam in Britain much of its character — is the Deobandi. It controls around 45 per cent of Britain’s mosques and nearly all the UK-based training of Islamic scholars. What most Deobandi scholars have in common is a conservative interpretation of Islamic law: television and music for the purposes of entertainment, for example, are frowned upon if not banned. Women are advised not to emerge from their homes any more than is necessary.

    For all its ferocity, the debate about British Islam does not seem to have developed much over the years. Successive governments have sought to boot out foreign imams and deny visas to radical clerics as if they were dealing with a contagion. It is, perhaps, time to stop blaming foreigners. Illiberal Islam is thoroughly British these days.
    http://www.differencebetween.net/mis...-and-deobandi/
    Last edited by Monk-Eye; 10th January 2017 at 07:27 PM.

  10. #30
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,335
    Thanks
    9272

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk-Eye View Post
    " Agonists Inviting More Trouble Calling It Equitable "

    * Extending Membership Conditioned On Common Creed *
    Are those marchers amassing as a growing population with elevated birth rates and at some percentage of the 1.2 million permanent immigrants to the US alone each year ?
    Yes.
    In general , are those marchers growing in political and social affluence backed by a massive propaganda campaign for their acceptance ?
    That's still a matter of public debate, but there's a lot of evidence that they are reaching a wider audience lately.

    Or are those marchers generally shunned and rebuked as hostile to individual liberty ?

    Somehow it has been overlooked that governments of fictional ishmaelism islam are designed and elected by its peoples who are only fleeing to escape the conflicts and who believe that their caustic beliefs provide valid standards for public policy rather than generally causing social afflictions for themselves and for others .
    Those two aren't mutually exclusive. If you take away the right of people speak in public, you also take away the right of the people to respond to them.


    Quote Originally Posted by Monk-Eye View Post
    " Importing Mental Psychosis "

    * Why Knot *

    How much affluence or influence should foreign potentates have within the united states ?

    Of course as long as political candidates do not directly receive campaign contributions from foreign potentates , which is illegal , is it okay to allow the chinese government to financially promote communist propaganda or its political organizers ?

    Who runs our mosques?


    Difference Between Salafi and Deobandi | Difference Between
    It's illegal for any government to foment a political insurrection within the United States, but that isn't what the law is about. The law is about whether the US should enforce the draconian and backwards anti-free speech and anti-freedom of religion laws on behalf of foreign dictators against their citizens when they are out of the reach of the dictator. The law is about foreign nationals who live in countries without freedom of religion or association or speech, and that, as punishment for being such slaves (either willingly or not) we should perpetuate that cruelty on them while they are visiting.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Made in the USA!!
    By Blueneck in forum Political Humor
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 20th May 2011, 01:08 PM
  2. How could the UN be made better?
    By katiegrrl0 in forum Economics
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 12th May 2010, 12:40 AM
  3. Made In the U.S.A..?
    By WhiteKong78 in forum Economics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 29th March 2008, 09:03 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed