COL Gene COL Gene

Afghan Man Could Be Put To Death For Becoming Christian!

▼

Afghan Man Could Be Put To Death For Becoming Christian!

from JoeUser Forums



The AP story of Abdul Rahman who converted from being Moslem to being a Christian must be put to death under Islamic Law. There are only two exceptions for ANY male that has done what he has done. Be declared insane or recant his conversion to Christianity. He was arrested for possessing a Bible. This story shows the utter folly of the U. S. trying to spread democracy in the Moslem World. We do not get it that for Moslems their religious beliefs are the MOST important part of their life and they DO NOT separate their religious beliefs from their secular life.

The simple fact is that the principals of Democracy and Islamic Law are diametrically opposed. Yesterday Bush admitted that this story was very troubling. How can we ask our young people to sacrifice their lives to support a society that totally rejects the most basic freedoms that our Democratic Society are based upon? This is just another example of how misguided the Bush policies are in the Moslem World! We can NOT supplant our democratic principals for Islamic Law in the Moslem world.
politics
18,173 views 64 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
For all his bluster, Gene has no understanding of the value and potential of freedom, whatsoever. Takes it all for granted and has a completely selfish point of view.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
For all his bluster, Gene has no understanding of the value and potential of freedom, whatsoever. Takes it all for granted and has a completely selfish point of view.


Amen, Brother Ben (a saying my dad always used).
Star Control: Origins
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yet, it's not near as sad as the leftiewing biased MSM's sudden and intense interest in the rights and life of one, individual Christian,


Is FOX News now included in MSM?
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
To risk our military to give Moslems the choice to set up governments that stand for things so opposed to our most basic beliefs in not something I agree with and I doubt most Americans want to see their military fighting such a war. We had no business deposing Saddam so the Iraqi people could set up an Islamic state that will most likely be a future problem. We were told this was to make us saver and that we were in danger from Saddam. Hell, we are in more danger now that he is gone from power in Iraq. It WAS NOT OUR BUSINESS to invade Iraq and it has NOT made us safer. There were NO terrorists operating in Iraq BEFORE we invaded. Bush provided them the opportunity to create trouble.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top

I never said we should not have gone into Afghanistan. We NEVER finish our work there because we went into Iraq that had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or posed ANY danger to the United States


BULL SH*T!!!! Try this one you old fool: Link

we are "still" hunting his raggedy butt!
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
In Bostwana, a fat lady stumbles and falls hurting her knee, and IT'S ALL BUSHES FAULT!"
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
Did anyone realize that Col changed topics evertime Baker shot down anything Col said? First he started with the muslim turn christian and how wrong Bush is for this happening, then he went on to how civil war in iraq in emminent (which has nothing to do with the point of the article), then he went on to Palestine and Hamas (which has nothing to do with the topic or the civil war) then he went on to how much money we are spending (which still has nothing to do with the topic or the civil war or Hamas).

He jumps from topic to topic to throw people off, it only shows he can't defend a sinlge topic here.

To risk our military to give Moslems the choice to set up governments that stand for things so opposed to our most basic beliefs in not something I agree with


Your opinion. You don't know the future of Iraq or any other country so this statement is worthless. You are negative, you want things to go wrong, you never gave muslims the benefit of the doubt.

and I doubt most Americans want to see their military fighting such a war.


Your opinion as well, remember what they say about assuming. I can't seem to figure out how you know what most Americans think. Remember Col, polls usually get answers from a small percentage of the American population, not everyone.

We had no business deposing Saddam so the Iraqi people could set up an Islamic state that will most likely be a future problem.


Again, your opinion. We have a responsability, as the worlds strongest country, to help those in need. Remember that. Our soldiers were being attacked in Iraq and that makes it our business. But what do you know, your mentality is to only keep what you believe in and discard any other information.

We were told this was to make us saver and that we were in danger from Saddam.


Fact. And it has, we have not been attack, many attacks have been foiled and we have the enemy on the run across the world and made it harder for them to plan any new attacks. As far as I'm concerned, that makes me safer. The chance on a large attack has been weakened.

Hell, we are in more danger now that he is gone from power in Iraq.


Opinion. Not so, like I stated above. Just because we have tapes of Osama or his buddies saying they are planning attacks doesn't mean they are stronger. Iran has put itself in a position where the whole world is watching so they can only do so little. Hamas is now in the opene and can not hide anymore. they now have the responsability of the people they Govern so they now have to become diplomatic or face the rest of the world on the same plain field and not that of a terrorist one. The way I see it, they made it easier for us now. The entire muslim world is being watched at all times and they will need to shape up or will be forced to ship out.

It WAS NOT OUR BUSINESS to invade Iraq and it has NOT made us safer.


Opinion. What a waste of time. Your new name will be Broken Record Col.

There were NO terrorists operating in Iraq BEFORE we invaded. Bush provided them the opportunity to create trouble.


More opinions. As if you actually knew that, I didn't know you worked for the CIA. They were there and proof was provided many times. But as usual, you only keep what you like and ignore the rest of the info.

That's all Col can do, provide opinions of what he thinks is wrong. But he can't back anything here up. No matter what we tell him, his mind is already set.
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
The common thread is that the Bush policy to fight terrorism is not working. All we have done is tied up a major portion of our military, spent a Trillion dollars when this is all over and killed and injured our young military members FOR WHAT? We are in as much danger today as before 9/11. The only reason we have not sustained another attack in the U S is because of our improved Homeland defense. It is NOT because the Bush policy in the Moslem world is working. We have as many or more enemies today then before 9/11.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
The common thread is that the Bush policy to fight terrorism is not working.


Says you, it seems to be working fine to me.

All we have done is tied up a major portion of our military, spent a Trillion dollars when this is all over and killed and injured our young military members FOR WHAT?


Only you can't see whats infront you. Your hatred towards Bush has blinded you.

We are in as much danger today as before 9/11.


Not true. We are more alert and paying more attention. We have shown to many countries what could happen if you mess with us.

The only reason we have not sustained another attack in the U S is because of our improved Homeland defense. It is NOT because the Bush policy in the Moslem world is working.


It's both, problem is you can't see it, correction, you refuse to see it.

We have as many or more enemies today then before 9/11.


If anything we have less, with all those dead in Iraq anyways. Let them hate all they want, they hated us before, they are only showing it now.
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Is FOX News now included in MSM?


No, it isn't. Fox shows positive stuff as well as the negative. That makes them "alternative media".
The MSM is where only the negative stuff about Bush and the war is featured. Negative; that's the keyword. Nothing positive.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
If the Bush policies are working for you, you must be part of the 10% that it is working for. There is NOTHING in Iraq that is working. If you think it is so great, go live in that HELL hole Bush has created. 80% of the people in Iraq want us out. About 2/3 of Americans want us to get out. If the Bush policies are working for you, you are NUTS!
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
If the Bush policies are working for you, you must be part of the 10% that it is working for. There is NOTHING in Iraq that is working. If you think it is so great, go live in that HELL hole Bush has created. 80% of the people in Iraq want us out. About 2/3 of Americans want us to get out. If the Bush policies are working for you, you are NUTS!
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
Rightwinger: Fox News is most certainly MSM, and the people who own it are easily as politically biased as anyone else, and state so openly and donate lots of money to Conservative causes. I like Fox News, but I can't stand here with a straight face and call them unbiased.

Col: you're removing all doubt.
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
Bush said today that freedom of religion is an absolutely indispensable tenant of any Democracy. Therefore, our actions that supported elections in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine that have resulted in the people selecting governments grounded in Islamic law that violates this essential tenant of a democracy-- religious freedom per GWB. What the Hell are we doing sacrificing the lives of our military and spending our tax dollars to create governments that violate the basic tenant of the democracy we say is the answer to our security? The foundation of the Bush argument to improve our security is built on SAND!
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
The he doesn't know the definition of Democracy any more than you do. I can't find where Bush said that, but I found that word for word here.

It would be 'tenet' I think, too. You continue to show your ignorance when you say things like that. I posted the definition of Democracy above, feel free to read it or continue to "remove all doubt" as you see fit.
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Bush statement was on Lou Dobbs and Hardball tonight.

This statement from your link, which I agree with, applies to the elections in Iraq and Palestine.

Sadly, that's not the freedom that's been liberated by our invasion of Afghanistan, a country where American blood continues to be shed in the name of democracy.

If these countries select governments that hold Islamic Law above freedom, then no more American Blood or treasuse sould be spent on these countries! If in the future one of these countries become a threat to our security, then we sould eliminate that country not try and turn it into something the people will not support.
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Again, this is the current government. These people, their children, or their grandchildren can at any time decide to reform their government. That freedom is what we fought for. It's a concept which people like you, who would gladly impose your will on anyone you could in your country or around the world, have no ability to appreciate.

*done*
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is Bush that is trying to impose his will on others both in this country and around the world. If you believe sending our military to their death and injury is worth what is going on in Iraq, you and I could not be further apart. NOW WE ARE DONE!
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
NOW WE ARE DONE!


Then go wipe yourself, you stink!

Bush said today that freedom of religion is an absolutely indispensable tenant of any Democracy. Therefore, our actions that supported elections in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine that have resulted in the people selecting governments grounded in Islamic law that violates this essential tenant of a democracy


REREAD what you've written! The PEOPLE "selected" a government based in Islamic law! What leads you to believe that what's being done is NOT freedom of religion?



It is Bush that is trying to impose his will on others both in this country and around the world


GW is impossing NOTHING of the sort.
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is Bush that is trying to impose his will on others both in this country and around the world.


Wait, let me get this straight. You're insisting that Bush is trying to impose his will on others around the world...yet the topic of this article revolves around the fact that Bush will NOT demand that Karzai refuse to allow this trial to go forward on the basis of the will of the United States? I'm confused here, COL.
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
Freedom of religion means EVERYONE is free to choose the religion, or lack of one, to embrace and believe in. That is NOT what the Islamic Law says. It is saying for a Moslem you can ONLY choose to remain committed to the Moslem religion. How is that freedom of religion? This is a basis issue. We can not send our military and provide our support to countries that have laws that state the only religion for Moslems is Islam. Today Sec of State Rice clearly said these must be the freedom to choose what ever faith you want to believe to be a democracy. Hell the people in an election could choose a communist form of government. Who would call that a democracy just because it was selected by the vote of the people. As soon as that choice was put into place, there was NO Democracy!
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
Freedom of religion is not a condition of democracy, Gene. You still don't get the distinction between values and governance. Our culture values freedom of religion. Other cultures clearly do not. Our founders (correctly) considered a state religion to be problematic in a democracy & wisely chose to avoid that, but that does not mean a democracy cannot exist without freedom of religion. Democracies are free to make those choices, or not. We got lucky here & take it for granted. Democracies which incorporate repressive aspects of religious laws will remain thwarted in modernization, but that's their problem, and their choice.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
I like Fox News, but I can't stand here with a straight face and call them unbiased.
WOW:)

Freedom of religion is not a condition of democracy
Perhaps, nonetheless, it is ironic that our Christian soldiers in Afghanistan are fighting for Shariah Law and not a modern constitution.
Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top
Christian soldiers


Excuse me? Since when have we had a "Christian" military? I could be wrong, but I suspect there are Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and adherents of a few other religions in our military, not to mention atheists.

Furthermore, you are mistaken about what they are fighting "for" - they are there to 1) eliminate a safe haven for Al Qaeda, and 2) having deposed the existing totalitarian theocracy, to enable the Afghani people to excercise their right of self-determination, in the process, hopefully but not certainly, making it less likely that Al Qaeda would find safe haven there again in the future. There is nothing "ironic" about that.
Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top
A bit of a history lesson is in order. WHY did the pilgrims come to the colonies? To escape religious persecution just like what the Islamic Law is doing. Why did our constitution insure FREEDON to CHOOSE (OR NOT CHOOSE) a particular religion? To prevent the very thing that is taking place under Islamic Law. Yes a democratic government must allow its citizens to choose their religion. The issue is WHY America should risk its young man and women and its treasure to enable governments that force their population to choose only ONE Religion to the extent of putting them to death. The answer is simple-- WE SHOUND NOT be committing the lives and treasure of America to ANY SUCH COUNTRIES!

We should let them decide their own issues and stay OUT. At the same time we should issue a VERY CLEAR warning that any future attack or support for an attack on this country will be met with an attack that will END the country that attacks us or supports any attack on America! WE will not invade or occupy their country. We will destroy it so it can never again pose a danger to us or other countries on this planet!