POL/REL: Taking the Oath of Office on the Koran

[JPhillips]

So let's examine our freedoms and see which one's are dangerous.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Well obviously religion, speech, assembly and petition are tools for the terrorists to undermine us.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Terrorists use guns. Gotta go.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

We'll put our soldiers wherever its needed to protect us.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If you can't conduct unreasonable searches the terrorists win.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

There's so many words here that I'm sure a fancy pants lawyer could use it to free terrorists. Should be condensed to "the ATF can't take my land"

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


Complete bullshit. Its like they were trying to give the country to the Ottoman Turks.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

We'll keep this, but write it in invisible ink just in case.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

If torture is good enough for Pol Pot its good enough for us.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

You don't have any rights if terrorists kill you.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

See amendment to Amendment IX.


So to really protect our freedoms we should get rid of the Bill of Rights except for a condensed Amendment V and an invisible ink version of Amendment VII. The new Bill of Patriot Rights reads:


The ATF can't take my land

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by heybrad

I'm trying my best to subscribe to your newsletter here, so just confirm for me please. Are you saying that this guys thinking is in line with Islamic clerics and that he wants to destroy the US, but if we make him swear on the Bible we'll all be ok?

not at all. What I am saying is that this is another example of how everybody has to go out of their way to accomadate the muslim who is not happy with the way things we have pretty much always been here. It is also a way (and this is what I really think is happening) for this man to get media attention and draw attention to the fact he is the first muslim congressman to be elected to office. That is what I think he is doing. I think he's feeding the entire muslim vs. Western world propaganda machine. What is says to muslim clerics and followers who are hell bend on our distruction is: see we are winning, allah is taking the U.S. This very same thing is happening in England and in France. Believe it or not the muslims who blew up the subway system in London, were either born there as Brits, or had been living there the better part of thier lives. That kind of propaganda is what is feeding much of the fires we fight. It seems like this guy is going out of his way to get it, yet I bet he said in his campaign he would vow to fight terrorism.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That, to some extent, is why Prager's column had me scratching my head.

On the one hand, I think I see what he's getting at -- basically trivializing the general tradition of swearing on a Bible by replacing it with another book (under the current circumstances, the Koran just adds insult to injury, but I don't get the impression that his overall point is meant to be specific to the Koran either).

But on the other hand, since having him use a Bible (or having an atheist use a Bible, or whatever) wouldn't really carry the traditional meaning, then I'm not sure why it would be a point for discussion.

Although if I'm right in my interpretation of what he's really getting at, then this isn't about the one guy & this one case, rather it's just a symptom of a larger & more serious issue.

Then again, there's also a possibility that the guy cut Prager off for a parking space or something.

Yeah, that's why I don't see this as a left-right issue. If I was a devout Christian, I would think I wouldn't want the guy to swear on the Bible, because it almost trivializes the intended meaning.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

not at all. What I am saying is that this is another example of how everybody has to go out of thier way to accomadate the muslim who is not happy with the way things we have pretty much always done things here. It is also a way (and this is what I really think is happening) for this man to get media attention and draw attention to the fact that he is the first muslim congressman to be elected to office. That is what I think he is doing. I think he's feeding the entire muslim vs. Western world propahganda machine. What is says to muslim clerics and followers who are hell bend on our distruction is: see we are winning, allah is taking the U.S. This very same thing is happening in England and in France. Beleive it or not the muslims who blew up the subway system in London, were either born there as Brits, or had been living there the better part of thier lives. That kind of propoghanda is what is feeding much of the fires we fight. It seems like this guy is going out of his way to get it, yet I bet he said in his campaign he would vow to fight terrorism.

I "believer" that "their" kind can spell "propaganda" or "accommodate" - so that's already a head start on you.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

I "believer" that "their" kind can spell "propaganda" or "accommodate" - so that's already a head start on you.

agreed, but I am typing very quickly, and I don't have time to spell check through mistakes. I have work to do. I know how to spell, trust me, but I need to respond very quickly.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

not at all. What I am saying is that this is another example of how everybody has to go out of thier way to accomadate the muslim who is not happy with the way things we have pretty much always done things here. It is also a way (and this is what I really think is happening) for this man to get media attention and draw attention to the fact that he is the first muslim congressman to be elected to office. That is what I think he is doing. I think he's feeding the entire muslim vs. Western world propahganda machine. What is says to muslim clerics and followers who are hell bend on our distruction is: see we are winning, allah is taking the U.S. This very same thing is happening in England and in France. Beleive it or not the muslims who blew up the subway system in London, were either born there as Brits, or had been living there the better part of thier lives. That kind of propoghanda is what is feeding much of the fires we fight. It seems like this guy is going out of his way to get it, yet I bet he said in his campaign he would vow to fight terrorism.

So if in 50 or 100 years, if the Muslims are the majority of a population in a county where they weren't previously, would you then say that a new form of apartheid should be implemented? Or are you saying that they should be kept out of countries because even if they are moderate Muslims, the radical fringe wants to do harm? Just as the KKK wasn't indicative of mainstream Christian thought 60 to 100 years ago, Al-Qaeda isn't indicative of mainstream Muslim thought now.

[RendeR]

this is a total non issue and anyone who thinks it has real merit should get some therapy.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by RendeR

this is a total non issue and anyone who thinks it has real merit should get some therapy.

Are you talking about all the people who have posted in this thread?

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Are you talking about all the people who have posted in this thread?

No, only those who believe swearing inon the koran or at all truly means anything in this day and age. its a ceremony, nothing more.

[Ryche]

I don't know how much attention to this Ellison is actually trying to draw or where he 'announced' this. It certainly hasn't been in the newspapers or received any attention here in Minnesota.

[Subby]

We aren't at war with Islam. There are plenty of peaceful, non-violent followers of Islam - just like there are plenty of Christian terrorists. If this guy was a Buddhist or a Sikh or a Hindu, I wonder if we would be having the same decibel of debate...

What really matters here is that asking a person of one religion to swear an oath on the holy book of another religion is completely disgraceful and demeaning to that person.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by cartman

So if in 50 or 100 years, if the Muslims are the majority of a population in a county where they weren't previously, would you then say that a new form of apartheid should be implemented? Or are you saying that they should be kept out of countries because even if they are moderate Muslims, the radical fringe wants to do harm? Just as the KKK wasn't indicative of mainstream Christian thought 60 to 100 years ago, Al-Qaeda isn't indicative of mainstream Muslim thought now.

I think the media and politicians go out their way to to let it be known that the are good muslims, and then there are bad muslims. Here is the fundamental problem: We know what the Koran states about the dealing with infadels, and how to "promote" Islam as a "world" religion. These same people are saying well, only the fundamenalist muslims are taking those scriptures to heart. But my problem is that I don't see a large enough uprise from within the muslim community itself to condem this way of thinking. Rather than think about telling the world what pieces of crap many muslims really are because of their beleifs, the muslim commuinty as a whole gets offened when a bunch of men on an airplane yelling about how great Bin laden is get escorted off the plane in Wisconsin. Why is that? So this is the problem. You have Muslims who claim they don't support what many of the "radicals" do, yet when given the chance to speak out the don't. But when they feel their rights have somehow been trampled on during a war on teror in which most of the suspects are middle eastern, they begin yelling bloody murder. I just find it difficult to trust those who behave in this manner.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Subby

What really matters here is that asking a person of one religion to swear an oath on the holy book of another religion is completely disgraceful and demeaning to that person.

Tell that to the Discordians.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Subby

We aren't at war with Islam. There are plenty of peaceful, non-violent followers of Islam - just like there are plenty of Christian terrorists. If this guy was a Buddhist or a Sikh or a Hindu, I wonder if we would be having the same decibel of debate...

What really matters here is that asking a person of one religion to swear an oath on the holy book of another religion is completely disgraceful and demeaning to that person.

This is where you are wrong...and so is the President, we ARE at war with Islam, no one wants to admit it though.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I think the media and politicians go out their way to to let it be known that the are good muslims, and then there are bad muslims. Here is the fundamental problem: We know what the Koran states about the dealing with infadels, and how to "promote" Islam as a "world" religion. These same people are saying well, only the fundamenalist muslims are taking those scriptures to heart. But my problem is that I don't see a large enough uprise from within the muslim community itself to condem this way of thinking.

I say this as a devout Christian...you realize the the OT is full of the same sorts of treatment for non-Jews (or non-Christians if you're a fan of Replacement Theology) that we gripe about in the Koran, right? We know not to take those passages as current instructions to go out and kill some infidels. I'm assuming that most of your average, work-a-day Muslims know the same thing about the Koran.

Let's talk about slutty women some more, please.

[Subby]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is where you are wrong...and so is the President, we ARE at war with Islam, no one wants to admit it though.

I think it is dangerous to take such a monolithic viewpoint here. If you treat them all as enemies, the it becomes self-fulfilling.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by RendeR

No, only those who believe swearing inon the koran or at all truly means anything in this day and age. its a ceremony, nothing more.

Are you saying that Keith Ellison should go to therapy because he wants to use the Koran instead of the Bible for his swearing in?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is where you are wrong...and so is the President, we ARE at war with Islam, no one wants to admit it though.

Ya hear that Indonesia? You're next!

[Subby]

Originally Posted by Drake

Tell that to the Discordians.

I love Wikipedia's ability to immediately dillute the power of obscure references.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Ya hear that Indonesia? You're next!

Someone should tell Imran that PSUColonel is at war with him.

[heybrad]

How would you even win a war against Islam? Keep fighting until they convert? Retreat? Submit? They're all dead? What?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Subby

I think it is dangerous to take such a monolithic viewpoint here.

Don't be too hard on the guy. Everyone knows that monoliths are just big symbols for penises. I'll admit that I'm guilty of seeing things from my penis's viewpoint way too often.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by heybrad

How would you even win a war against Islam? Keep fighting until they convert? Retreat? Submit? They're all dead? What?

If the Islamo War against Judaism is any indicator, I think it's the "all dead" part.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Dutch

If the Islamo War against Judaism is any indicator, I think it's the "all dead" part.

I see you beat me to that one.

Ah well, I'm moving furniture all over the friggin' house right now, I suppose that is going to reduce my chances at getting first crack at the obvious.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I think the media and politicians go out their way to to let it be known that the are good muslims, and then there are bad muslims. Here is the fundamental problem: We know what the Koran states about the dealing with infadels, and how to "promote" Islam as a "world" religion. These same people are saying well, only the fundamenalist muslims are taking those scriptures to heart. But my problem is that I don't see a large enough uprise from within the muslim community itself to condem this way of thinking. Rather than think about telling the world what pieces of crap many muslims really are because of their beleifs, the muslim commuinty as a whole gets offened when a bunch of men on an airplane yelling about how great Bin laden is get escorted off the plane in Wisconsin. Why is that? So this is the problem. You have Muslims who claim they don't support what many of the "radicals" do, yet when given the chance to speak out the don't. But when they feel their rights have somehow been trampled on during a war on teror in which most of the suspects are middle eastern, they begin yelling bloody murder. I just find it difficult to trust those who behave in this manner.

Hello, PSU Colonel. I wanted to address your understanding of Christianity and Islam. I don't particulalrly care about what anybody's opinion is of swearing on one book or another - largely symbolic gestures that hold little weight today. However, this post by you nad triggered several thoughts for me that I wanted to briefly discuss.

By way of background, I am an ordained Baptist minister.

One of your comments is this:

We know what the Koran states about the dealing with infadels, and how to "promote" Islam as a "world" religion.

In fact, if a religion does not want to convert people, or if that is what they claim, then I would be very suspicious of that. I truly believe Christ is my savior and the route to salvation and heaven. Why wouldn't I want to share that with others? Similarly, why wouldn't a Muslim who also sincerely beleives in an alterante route want to share that? This is not suspect but a foundational rock of many religions, especially Christianity:

This is a quote from Jesus to his disciples after he was raisied from the dead just before the Ascension. It is commonly referred to as The Great Commission.

“All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Mt. 28:18-20 ASV).

"All nations...unto the ends of the world" Sounds like Christianity wants to do the exact thing you accuse Islam of wanting.


You later claim this:

You have Muslims who claim they don't support what many of the "radicals" do, yet when given the chance to speak out the don't.

To be fair, if this were true, I'd think you have a good point. I'm not sure it is true, of course, and I'd want documentation of when or if major Muslim organizations refused to denounce terrorism.

However, if you think failure to denounce radicals in your own faith is merely a Muslim thing, think again. Here's another key scripture from Christianity:

Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. (1 John 4:8)

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:10)

Now about brotherly love we do not need to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love each other. (1 Thessalonians 4:9)

I could, of course, post another 100 scriptures that says that God is love or that God loves us all. This is a founding truth of the Christian faith.

So why do Christians just walk by when extremsists are holding up the "God Hates Fags" signs? Why do Christians turn their back and refuse to speak when other people who claim to be Christian speak a gospel of hate?

Think that's merely a facet of Islam? It's not, I assure you.

-Anxiety

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by RendeR

No, only those who believe swearing inon the koran or at all truly means anything in this day and age. its a ceremony, nothing more.

Perhaps to you, but there are plenty of people that take this seriously. I, for one, don't take it seriously but I recognize that it's quite important to others. I think there are still quite a few of them out there.

[Raiders Army]

On the other topic, freedom of religion shouldn't just be practiced in theory.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

not at all. What I am saying is that this is another example of how everybody has to go out of their way to accomadate the muslim who is not happy with the way things we have pretty much always been here. It is also a way (and this is what I really think is happening) for this man to get media attention and draw attention to the fact he is the first muslim congressman to be elected to office. That is what I think he is doing. I think he's feeding the entire muslim vs. Western world propaganda machine. What is says to muslim clerics and followers who are hell bend on our distruction is: see we are winning, allah is taking the U.S. This very same thing is happening in England and in France. Believe it or not the muslims who blew up the subway system in London, were either born there as Brits, or had been living there the better part of thier lives. That kind of propaganda is what is feeding much of the fires we fight. It seems like this guy is going out of his way to get it, yet I bet he said in his campaign he would vow to fight terrorism.

As far as I can see, the only reason this is getting media attention is from peole like you freaking out about it. I also do not see anywhere that he's "announcing" this or making a big production. Seems to me that no one would know about this if people like you just let it happen and didn't say anything, no one would know the difference unless they have binoculars at the ceremony and publish the pictures all over the internet.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by wade moore

You're trying to drive to the same point as me here that I don't think PSU has answered yet, he's danced around the question here.

Would you be happy if this same Muslim electee swore on the Bible? Would you only be happy if he was a non-Muslim swearing on the Bible? Maybe a Christian swearing on the Koran?

I'm not sure that I understand what would make you ok with this situation.

I can answer that question. But you probably already know what it would be.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

I can answer that question. But you probably already know what it would be.

He pretty much gave his answer here:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is where you are wrong...and so is the President, we ARE at war with Islam, no one wants to admit it though.

[lordscarlet]

To extend upon what someone else says (I'm too lazy too see who): And what if Islam is the majority in the United States in 100 years? What if they hold 90% of the elected offices in the country? So what? You (PSUColonel) have a problem with people choosing their own religion and elected officials? So that means that Islam has "won"? If it does, then who cares? That's just the flow of life. Classic civilization was "won" by christianity in Europe. Christians all but whiped out the native cultures of the United States and South America. It's how we came to be and it's how the future will come to be. The sort of talk you are spewing is what causes these wars. If someone believes in Allah and the teachings of the Koran then they have that right in the United States. If Everyone believes in Allah and the teachings of the Koran then they have that right in the United States.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Drake

dola...

I'd tell you what those oaths are, of course, but then I'd have to kill you. Or kill myself. I don't remember exactly.

Are you actually a Mason?

[heybrad]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Christians all but whiped out the native cultures of the United States and South America. It's how we came to be and it's how the future will come to be.

Just think, if those cultures had just had their own damn message board, they could have put a stop to whole thing.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

To extend upon what someone else says (I'm too lazy too see who): And what if Islam is the majority in the United States in 100 years? What if they hold 90% of the elected offices in the country? So what? You (PSUColonel) have a problem with people choosing their own religion and elected officials? So that means that Islam has "won"? If it does, then who cares? That's just the flow of life. Classic civilization was "won" by christianity in Europe. Christians all but whiped out the native cultures of the United States and South America. It's how we came to be and it's how the future will come to be. The sort of talk you are spewing is what causes these wars. If someone believes in Allah and the teachings of the Koran then they have that right in the United States. If Everyone believes in Allah and the teachings of the Koran then they have that right in the United States.

I think the common fear is that if this happens, those offices wouldn't be elected, and you wouldn't be able to choose a religions. The religion will be Islam, and that's that. And in any event, folks are much more willing to be the wiper than the wipee.

I'm not so sure about the "flow of life" argument. Sure, you can argue that Islam may or may not be trying to do whatever (not meaning to do that here). But "who cares, that's the flow" wouldn't have likely been the best plan in say, dealing with the Nazis for instance.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Are you actually a Mason?

Yes.

And yes, contrary to popular opinion, I'm allowed to tell you that. If I wasn't allowed to tell anyone, why would I drive around with a Masonic license plate? Or wear a Masonic ring?

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I think the common fear is that if this happens, those offices wouldn't be elected, and you wouldn't be able to choose a religions. The religion will be Islam, and that's that. And in any event, folks are much more willing to be the wiper than the wipee.

I'm not so sure about the "flow of life" argument. Sure, you can argue that Islam may or may not be trying to do whatever (not meaning to do that here). But "who cares, that's the flow" wouldn't have likely been the best plan in say, dealing with the Nazis for instance.

You obviously took an extreme, but in the case of the United States, as long as it's done within the bounds of the law, as an American Traditionalist, I don't think we should bend the laws to prevent a change in the majority religion.

[Toddzilla]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Hello, PSU Colonel. I wanted to address your understanding of Christianity and Islam....{fantastic post edited}

PSUColonel=pwned

Reminds me of a great bumpersticker I saw once (which is where all great thinking resides, on bumpers):

"I believe that when Jesus said 'Love Thy Enemy' he didn't mean kill them"

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Drake

I'm a non-practicing guitarist.

In which case you should swear on The Manic Street Preachers 3rd album

[Subby]

DEATH TO IMRAN!

[kurtism]

Originally Posted by Drake

Tell that to the Discordians.

Would a Discordian swear on a golden apple? A copy of the Illuminatus Trilogy? What about the connection between Masons and Discordians? And most importantly, why has the discussion turned away from slutty women?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by kurtism

Would a Discordian swear on a golden apple?

They could swear on this and it'd be more amusing:



Yes, that's right, it's the accordion for Discordians... ok, I'm leaving this thread now. That was awful even for me.

SI

[Drake]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

They could swear on this and it'd be more amusing:



Yes, that's right, it's the accordion for Discordians... ok, I'm leaving this thread now. That was awful even for me.

SI

Hahahaha! No, stay, please!

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Drake

Yes.

And yes, contrary to popular opinion, I'm allowed to tell you that. If I wasn't allowed to tell anyone, why would I drive around with a Masonic license plate? Or wear a Masonic ring?

Can I join?

[Ryche]

Funny enough, I work at the MN Secretary of State's office and just before I left for the day we got a call from a rather irate person about this oath and whether it was required that he swear in on the Bible. Glad I wasn't the person who took that call.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Can I join?

Lenny: Your membership pack. {hands it to him}
Homer: {pulls out a decal} What's this?
Lenny: You put that sticker on your car so you won't get any tickets. And this other one keeps paramedics from stealing your wallet while they're working on you.
Carl: Oh, and don't bother calling 911 any more...here's the *real* number. {hands him a card with "912"}
Homer: Ooh!

SI

[Warhammer]

Hell, I hope they film the ceremony and put it on Al Jazeera for the Middle East to see. Put a big arrow pointing to the Koran and have big letters saying "The Koran" and let him say "So help me Allah."

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

So why do Christians just walk by when extremsists are holding up the "God Hates Fags" signs? Why do Christians turn their back and refuse to speak when other people who claim to be Christian speak a gospel of hate?

Here's a difference between Christians and Muslims in the modern age:

We "turn our backs" when radical Christains spout hatred towards homosexuals. Muslims just kill them.

In EVERY SINGLE Islamic Middle East country, being a homosexual is a crime punishable by death.

Before anyone goes off about how "loving" and "caring" Muslims are, just remember that.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Hell, I hope they film the ceremony and put it on Al Jazeera for the Middle East to see. Put a big arrow pointing to the Koran and have big letters saying "The Koran" and let him say "So help me Allah."

Wow, I didn't expect this from you.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Here's a difference between Christians and Muslims in the modern age:

We "turn our backs" when radical Christains spout hatred towards homosexuals. Muslims just kill them.

In EVERY SINGLE Islamic Middle East country, being a homosexual is a crime punishable by death.

Before anyone goes off about how "loving" and "caring" Muslims are, just remember that.

I'm sure there are quite a few "Christians" who would be in favor of making homosexuality a crime punishable by death. After all, doesn't the Bible say you should kill a man who lies with another man?

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

I'm sure there are quite a few "Christians" who would be in favor of making homosexuality a crime punishable by death. After all, doesn't the Bible say you should kill a man who lies with another man?

That's true, but those are the exception, hense the reason why it's NOT a law like that. Apparently either the majority of muslims in that country do not disagree with the law, or they're silent about it. Either way, it's still the law there.

In other words, we don't allow the extremists to run things here, dispite what you may think. They do.