Who thinks that obama did the right thing by condemning the pastor in Florida for burning the koran? Ill make it private so no one feels like they might get some backlash for their poll answer. Feel free to expand on your answer.
obama
Quote:
sorry, No he was not correct in his choice is what it should say. sorry.
Originally posted by
married with children
Who thinks that obama did the right thing by condemning the pastor in Florida for burning the koran? Ill make it private so no one feels like they might get some backlash for their poll answer. Feel free to expand on your answer.
04/05/2011
I think the call was right.
One of America's strongest points is that it is not a one-religion country; therefore not compelled to align itself with one religion over another. True, Christianity as a whole is the predominate religion, but there are growing numbers of people who are freely following their heart to other religions. That's a great thing about America; there is no "Church of America". People can choose to practice or not practice whichever religion they like.
My personal belief is that burning a copy of the Qur'an is as bad as burning a copy of the Bible (in any of its forms).
One of America's strongest points is that it is not a one-religion country; therefore not compelled to align itself with one religion over another. True, Christianity as a whole is the predominate religion, but there are growing numbers of people who are freely following their heart to other religions. That's a great thing about America; there is no "Church of America". People can choose to practice or not practice whichever religion they like.
My personal belief is that burning a copy of the Qur'an is as bad as burning a copy of the Bible (in any of its forms).
04/05/2011
I do not believe he was correct. This country was made on the principle of free speech. What one person, or group does should be up to them, as long as there is no violence associated with it. Our government has no right to dictate what anyone should say. Now, do I think it morally right, no! Religion, in all its forms, should teach love and respect. I still firmly believe government should have no say in it and the freedom of speech article in the Constitution has been walked on too much already!
04/05/2011
No, he had no right whatsoever.
That fucktard douchebag in Florida knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were going to be and he did it anyway. I personally believe he should be brought up on murder charges. It had been in the news for months what he planned to do, he was advised of what hell it could create and now what was it...12 (?) people are dead?
That fucktard douchebag in Florida knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were going to be and he did it anyway. I personally believe he should be brought up on murder charges. It had been in the news for months what he planned to do, he was advised of what hell it could create and now what was it...12 (?) people are dead?
04/05/2011
In a way I agree, it was morally wrong, but it was still a freedom granted in this country. My response to what happened is that we, as people of the U.S., given those freedoms that conflict with other peoples of this world, then we do not belong being over there. We as a people cannot and should not rewrite our Constitution or take away freedoms that our forefathers died for just to appease another group of people. People have burned our flag, books and yes, the Bible. I don't see us going on a rampage or their governments trying to appease us. If my freedoms are dictated by others overseas, then America is truly a dead idea.
04/05/2011
Quote:
Love that last line.
Originally posted by
markeagleone
In a way I agree, it was morally wrong, but it was still a freedom granted in this country. My response to what happened is that we, as people of the U.S., given those freedoms that conflict with other peoples of this world, then we do not belong
...
In a way I agree, it was morally wrong, but it was still a freedom granted in this country. My response to what happened is that we, as people of the U.S., given those freedoms that conflict with other peoples of this world, then we do not belong being over there. We as a people cannot and should not rewrite our Constitution or take away freedoms that our forefathers died for just to appease another group of people. People have burned our flag, books and yes, the Bible. I don't see us going on a rampage or their governments trying to appease us. If my freedoms are dictated by others overseas, then America is truly a dead idea.
04/05/2011
Quote:
Your freedoms aren't just dictated by others overseas, they're dictated by how they affect other people. Your rights end where another person's nose begins.
Originally posted by
markeagleone
In a way I agree, it was morally wrong, but it was still a freedom granted in this country. My response to what happened is that we, as people of the U.S., given those freedoms that conflict with other peoples of this world, then we do not belong
...
In a way I agree, it was morally wrong, but it was still a freedom granted in this country. My response to what happened is that we, as people of the U.S., given those freedoms that conflict with other peoples of this world, then we do not belong being over there. We as a people cannot and should not rewrite our Constitution or take away freedoms that our forefathers died for just to appease another group of people. People have burned our flag, books and yes, the Bible. I don't see us going on a rampage or their governments trying to appease us. If my freedoms are dictated by others overseas, then America is truly a dead idea.
Just because we have the freedom to do whatever we wish, doesn't mean we should exercise that freedom. It also doesn't free us of taking on criticism based on the choices we make in exercising that freedom.
04/05/2011
Quote:
That's very true. But in all reality, that very criticism is another freedom. I have the right to say I don't like what happened, or the judgements that were made, but I do respect the right for the person making them. If we, as a people, start to take away just 1 thing, then we have set ourselves up for a fall. I may not like others judgements, but I do respect their right to make them. It is a right given to the people of this nation by all the ones who suffered and died for us to enjoy those freedoms. The major part I disagree with is that my freedoms should not be controlled by people overseas. If they honor "our" Constitution and abide by it, then I could see them printing their disagreements with what happened. But, to take a life that wasn't endangering anyone else is an act of barbarism. To say I have to respect that and change the freedoms here to accommodate that is one thing I will never agree to!
Originally posted by
sarahbear
Your freedoms aren't just dictated by others overseas, they're dictated by how they affect other people. Your rights end where another person's nose begins.
Just because we have the freedom to do whatever we wish, doesn't mean we ...
Just because we have the freedom to do whatever we wish, doesn't mean we ...
Your freedoms aren't just dictated by others overseas, they're dictated by how they affect other people. Your rights end where another person's nose begins.
Just because we have the freedom to do whatever we wish, doesn't mean we should exercise that freedom. It also doesn't free us of taking on criticism based on the choices we make in exercising that freedom.
Just because we have the freedom to do whatever we wish, doesn't mean we should exercise that freedom. It also doesn't free us of taking on criticism based on the choices we make in exercising that freedom.
04/05/2011
Yes, I do agree that the nation of today removes your freedoms where other peoples noses begin. I saw that drop side cribs are now illegal. Funny, I had one when I was born and all my kids have had them. I don't remember any of my family dying due to a malfunction. Maybe people of today just aren't as careful as their parents were.
I worked for Ford before the seatbelt laws. Extensive tests showed a 50-50 chance in a crash above 30 mph. That was a good law! I think motorcycle riders should have seatbelts also. At least, it would keep the mess intact.
Those were just a two examples of my freedoms ending due to some idiot lawmakers that think I am uncapable of deciding what's best for me. Funny, they had me serve this great country, but consider me and everyone in it a bunch of morons.
I worked for Ford before the seatbelt laws. Extensive tests showed a 50-50 chance in a crash above 30 mph. That was a good law! I think motorcycle riders should have seatbelts also. At least, it would keep the mess intact.
Those were just a two examples of my freedoms ending due to some idiot lawmakers that think I am uncapable of deciding what's best for me. Funny, they had me serve this great country, but consider me and everyone in it a bunch of morons.
04/05/2011
How is that we can disrespect every national and religious symbol in the name of free speech - except Muslim symbols? Maplethorpe was praised for dissing christian symbols and anti US types burn the flag whenever the mood strikes them.
Protect all national and religious symbols - or you can protect none. We just need to stop sucking up to Muslims in an effort to appease them.
Protect all national and religious symbols - or you can protect none. We just need to stop sucking up to Muslims in an effort to appease them.
04/05/2011
Quote:
I agree. It's one thing to be critisized for religious beliefs, nationalities, etc., but when our citizens are threatened or killed, I believe that to be an act of war-as well as an act against humanity. It falls back to the old rhyme-Sticks and stones can break our bones, but names will never harm us. Are we dealing with children in adult skin? Honestly, I am a christian and I have done a lot of research. Many people worship the big, red guy, and although they make a mockery of my own personal beliefs, it is their right to do so, and I would defend that right with my life. Honestly, what the hell happened to this country? We go after a guy that exercised his freedom to appease a group that killed our citizens. I think if our forefathers were here today, they would be in tears as to what we made of their ideal country.
Originally posted by
Gunsmoke
How is that we can disrespect every national and religious symbol in the name of free speech - except Muslim symbols? Maplethorpe was praised for dissing christian symbols and anti US types burn the flag whenever the mood strikes
...
How is that we can disrespect every national and religious symbol in the name of free speech - except Muslim symbols? Maplethorpe was praised for dissing christian symbols and anti US types burn the flag whenever the mood strikes them.
Protect all national and religious symbols - or you can protect none. We just need to stop sucking up to Muslims in an effort to appease them.
Protect all national and religious symbols - or you can protect none. We just need to stop sucking up to Muslims in an effort to appease them.
If our government thinks that throwing out the Constitution to appease a group of barbarians is right, then our leaders have failed us. Every citizen in this great nation is gold. Anyone that threatens that, should be dealt with swiftly and harshly.
04/05/2011
Again, I apologize. I was taught the Constitution in grade school. I found it to be more than words on a old piece of paper. I found it to be an ideal, probably the greatest ever made by a group of people. I am sorry that things in this country have gone so astray from it, but the thought of what they invisioned lives on, at least for those of us whom actually took the time and thought about what they wanted.
04/05/2011
Quote:
terrorist kill because that is what they do. They killed the UN workers because they were westerner's, and used the pastor as an excuse for their actions.
Originally posted by
Stormy
No, he had no right whatsoever.
That fucktard douchebag in Florida knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were going to be and he did it anyway. I personally believe he should be brought up on murder charges. It had ...
That fucktard douchebag in Florida knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were going to be and he did it anyway. I personally believe he should be brought up on murder charges. It had ...
No, he had no right whatsoever.
That fucktard douchebag in Florida knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were going to be and he did it anyway. I personally believe he should be brought up on murder charges. It had been in the news for months what he planned to do, he was advised of what hell it could create and now what was it...12 (?) people are dead?
That fucktard douchebag in Florida knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were going to be and he did it anyway. I personally believe he should be brought up on murder charges. It had been in the news for months what he planned to do, he was advised of what hell it could create and now what was it...12 (?) people are dead?
04/06/2011
Quote:
thank you for your service!
Originally posted by
markeagleone
I apologize to everyone. I went and served this great nation and was willing to give my life to protect the freedoms we all enjoy. When those freedoms are threatened, here or abroad, I take high offense to it! I am sorry.
04/06/2011
I think we have gotten a little off topic. I think that most of us believe that what the pastor did was not correct, that his words spoken were not christian, and that it was a bad choice. The question was posted to see if we think that the government should condemn a US citizen for his free speech. The president takes a oath to protect the constitution and all its freedoms that our forefathers took the time to put down on that piece of paper.
04/06/2011
Quote:
No, the government has no business publicly condemning a citizen for exercising free speech as long as no laws were broken in exercising the free speech. However, society can and will and SHOULD be able to freely criticize divisive statements and attitudes. So, while it is fine to have a public backlash against divisive speech and behavior, the government needs to stay out of it unless the rights of another party are *directly* violated by the person supposedly exercising his or her rights.
Originally posted by
married with children
I think we have gotten a little off topic. I think that most of us believe that what the pastor did was not correct, that his words spoken were not christian, and that it was a bad choice. The question was posted to see if we think that the
...
I think we have gotten a little off topic. I think that most of us believe that what the pastor did was not correct, that his words spoken were not christian, and that it was a bad choice. The question was posted to see if we think that the government should condemn a US citizen for his free speech. The president takes a oath to protect the constitution and all its freedoms that our forefathers took the time to put down on that piece of paper.
I don't AT ALL agree with what the pastor did and find it extremely disrespectful, distasteful, and unnecessary. But the reason I believe the government should stay out of it is because the government cannot legislate morality and still preserve the freedoms of a wide variety of people who hold different belief systems.
If the government did try to legislate morality, whose morality should we choose to dictate to everyone else? If the government condemns one act of free speech because it offends people, then the government should condemn any act of free speech that offends another group of people. And we definitely should not kowtow and capitulate to those who would murder innocent people just because they're, like, pissed off, ya know? If anger over someone else's actions and words can be taken seriously as a legitimate justification of murder, there would not be ANY semblance of civilization.
Holding the pastor guilty of the actions of a third party is unreasonable. We are EACH responsible for our own actions. We cannot be held responsible for anyone else's. The pastor is responsible for burning a book that is sacred to a specific group of people and uttering inflammatory speech. His actions and words were offensive to many people. But being offended by someone else's behavior is never, never, NEVER justification for harming another person, let alone taking another person's life. The terrorists are responsible for freely choosing to take innocent lives in response to their anger. It is the terrorists and the terrorists alone who have blood on their hands. I don't buy into this "but you pissed me off so much that I just HAD to do this" crap. That is the mindset of those who blame rape victims and those who routinely engage in domestic violence. Their actions are never their own responsibility; there is always someone else to blame for their freely-chosen actions.
Do we want the government to start condemning all acts of free speech? I can guarantee you that no matter what it is being demonstrated, there will be someone who deems their beliefs and actions to be immoral and distasteful.
That said, I want to emphasize that I understand that we do not live in a vacuum. I strongly believe we should accept that our statements and actions can and do hurt others and thus make a concentrated effort to be more respectful. I have always believed in the importance of being respectful to others REGARDLESS of whether we receive respect in return. There is merit in being considerate to others simply because we want to be respectful people. But we can't make others be respectful in return. We just need to try to take the high road and do our best not to join those who offend us in the gutter.
04/06/2011
Quote:
Provoking a terrorist group is a pretty shitty thing to do, regardless. He should be brought up on charges. Set precedent. He KNEW what would happen. Had been warned a dozen times...did it anyway and now people are dead. The attack on the UN wouldn't have happened if it weren't for his actions.
Originally posted by
married with children
terrorist kill because that is what they do. They killed the UN workers because they were westerner's, and used the pastor as an excuse for their actions.
04/06/2011
So what you are saying is that I, and everyone else on the planet should walk on eggshells, give up what we have as freedoms, kiss the asses of the terrorists, for what? If we are there, it should be for a good reason. If there are terrorists, hunt them down. They are not part of the human race by any moral means. What you state is if you know there is a mass murderer around that has and is willing to kill again, we should stay in our homes and lock our doors, instead of getting rid of the problem. I do not see how that makes any kind of sense.
04/06/2011
I would be one willing to go, but my age won't allow me. Anyone that is willing to kill for mere words, or stupid acts, should not be a part of this human race. We are better then the earlier man we came from and should not sink back to that mentality. Maybe if we had given them the world, they wouldn't have killed the men, women and children on 9/11. Freedom is something earned, usually by bloodshed. I think the new generation hasn't learned that lesson yet. Yes, all those buried at our national cemetaries died so you have the right to say what you want, to do what you want, within the laws set by our forefathers.
04/06/2011
I will not post any further comments on this thread. To answer the question, no, our government has no right to comment on someone expressing their rights. Yes, we the people can say we don't agree with it, but we respect your right as one of us to express your opinions. Our government should be going after the terrorists as they do any virus that attacks our people. No, I do not think we should give up any freedoms to appease sub-rate humans. Yes, I am speaking only of terrorists, all nationalities included. Better yet, why doesn't other nations police themselves, we do. Yes, we have gone overboard, but then it has been a long time anyone here had to fight to save the country, not just oil or political reasons-you know, the police actions are soldiers fight in and die, but it's technically not a war and we receive no benefit from it. To me, a bullet is a bullet, and if our country says go, it should be to war. Our soldiers are warriors, not police. That I do remember from the oath I took. A police action is a way the president can do what he wants without backing by the people he serves. It's really a great deal. He's elected to serve, and if the people don't agree, he can do what he wants anyway. Now that's a job I want.
04/06/2011
- 1
Total posts:
43
Unique posters: 17
Unique posters: 17