[KSMountain]

I have never been called a preacher before! That is awesome! Thank you. I can’t wait to tell my wife (seriously).

I did not say all muslims are violent Arraya, and I don’t believe that. I know and love people of many faiths and no faith.

But I did quote someone who wrote “Islam has bloody borders”. And if you research that quote you will find that it is well-substantiated by *fact*, inconvenient and surprising as you may find that.

[KSMountain]

I have never been called a preacher before! That is awesome! Thank you. I can’t wait to tell my wife (seriously).

I did not say all muslims are violent Arraya, and I don’t believe that. I know and love people of many faiths and no faith.

But I did quote someone who wrote “Islam has bloody borders”. And if you research that quote you will find that it is well-substantiated by *fact*, inconvenient and surprising as you may find that.

[KSMountain]

“Islam din wa-dawla” = “Islam is religion and state”.

I’m thinking that worldview is not really compatible with the u.s. constitution, nor with that of many other nations.

And speaking for Temeculaguy, it would be a sad world if bikinis were outlawed.

[KSMountain]

“Islam din wa-dawla” = “Islam is religion and state”.

I’m thinking that worldview is not really compatible with the u.s. constitution, nor with that of many other nations.

And speaking for Temeculaguy, it would be a sad world if bikinis were outlawed.

[KSMountain]

“Islam din wa-dawla” = “Islam is religion and state”.

I’m thinking that worldview is not really compatible with the u.s. constitution, nor with that of many other nations.

And speaking for Temeculaguy, it would be a sad world if bikinis were outlawed.

[KSMountain]

“Islam din wa-dawla” = “Islam is religion and state”.

I’m thinking that worldview is not really compatible with the u.s. constitution, nor with that of many other nations.

And speaking for Temeculaguy, it would be a sad world if bikinis were outlawed.

[KSMountain]

“Islam din wa-dawla” = “Islam is religion and state”.

I’m thinking that worldview is not really compatible with the u.s. constitution, nor with that of many other nations.

And speaking for Temeculaguy, it would be a sad world if bikinis were outlawed.

[KSMountain]

Hmmm, Arraya, I gotta lean more towards surveyor’s side.

There’s a saying, maybe it’s from Huntington’s “Clash of civilizations” paper (easily found online):
“Islam has bloody borders”

And it turns out to be true – there are islamic-related conflicts going on all *over* the world. Part of this I think is in the nature of Islam that *explicitly* does not separate religion and government.

There are not as many folks trying to overthrow governments in the name of Christianity, as far as I know. In fact didn’t Jesus (per the religion) say “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? That to me seems like a directive to accept whatever host government you may fall under, and is a *clear difference* from Islam.

You accuse surveyor of being dogmatic, but you also should not close your mind to the idea that different religions might have different tenets – they’re not all identical!

[KSMountain]

Hmmm, Arraya, I gotta lean more towards surveyor’s side.

There’s a saying, maybe it’s from Huntington’s “Clash of civilizations” paper (easily found online):
“Islam has bloody borders”

And it turns out to be true – there are islamic-related conflicts going on all *over* the world. Part of this I think is in the nature of Islam that *explicitly* does not separate religion and government.

There are not as many folks trying to overthrow governments in the name of Christianity, as far as I know. In fact didn’t Jesus (per the religion) say “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? That to me seems like a directive to accept whatever host government you may fall under, and is a *clear difference* from Islam.

You accuse surveyor of being dogmatic, but you also should not close your mind to the idea that different religions might have different tenets – they’re not all identical!

[KSMountain]

Hmmm, Arraya, I gotta lean more towards surveyor’s side.

There’s a saying, maybe it’s from Huntington’s “Clash of civilizations” paper (easily found online):
“Islam has bloody borders”

And it turns out to be true – there are islamic-related conflicts going on all *over* the world. Part of this I think is in the nature of Islam that *explicitly* does not separate religion and government.

There are not as many folks trying to overthrow governments in the name of Christianity, as far as I know. In fact didn’t Jesus (per the religion) say “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? That to me seems like a directive to accept whatever host government you may fall under, and is a *clear difference* from Islam.

You accuse surveyor of being dogmatic, but you also should not close your mind to the idea that different religions might have different tenets – they’re not all identical!

[KSMountain]

Hmmm, Arraya, I gotta lean more towards surveyor’s side.

There’s a saying, maybe it’s from Huntington’s “Clash of civilizations” paper (easily found online):
“Islam has bloody borders”

And it turns out to be true – there are islamic-related conflicts going on all *over* the world. Part of this I think is in the nature of Islam that *explicitly* does not separate religion and government.

There are not as many folks trying to overthrow governments in the name of Christianity, as far as I know. In fact didn’t Jesus (per the religion) say “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? That to me seems like a directive to accept whatever host government you may fall under, and is a *clear difference* from Islam.

You accuse surveyor of being dogmatic, but you also should not close your mind to the idea that different religions might have different tenets – they’re not all identical!

[KSMountain]

Hmmm, Arraya, I gotta lean more towards surveyor’s side.

There’s a saying, maybe it’s from Huntington’s “Clash of civilizations” paper (easily found online):
“Islam has bloody borders”

And it turns out to be true – there are islamic-related conflicts going on all *over* the world. Part of this I think is in the nature of Islam that *explicitly* does not separate religion and government.

There are not as many folks trying to overthrow governments in the name of Christianity, as far as I know. In fact didn’t Jesus (per the religion) say “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? That to me seems like a directive to accept whatever host government you may fall under, and is a *clear difference* from Islam.

You accuse surveyor of being dogmatic, but you also should not close your mind to the idea that different religions might have different tenets – they’re not all identical!

[KSMountain]

[quote=briansd1]Liberal progressive ideals will always win out, sooner or later. Conservatives just retard progress.[/quote]
It’s not their ideals that concern me, it’s their ideas. I think a lot of times half-baked ideas are thrown out just to “do something”. Then it becomes obvious within sometimes only a couple of years or sometimes more than that that maybe there was a reason things used to be the way they were, and maybe it wasn’t so bad after all.

Take relaxing the 20% down on home loans as an example. Or moratoriums on foreclosures as another. Or unindexed AMT as another. These were all “ideas” that turned out to be not so good. Will nationalized health care also turn out to have been something we should have been more careful about?

Actually I guess the ideals concern me too. That somehow a utopia can be created where the government ensures nothing bad can happen to anyone. Wrong.

I guess I’m doing the strawman thing here – sorry.

Using engineering terminology, to respond to your statement, I’d say if we gave the liberals their way, we’d have an underdamped society. The conservatives add a little damping to hopefully improve stability – at the cost of responsiveness.

Do you agree? Or are the conservatives literally just redneck neanderthals?

[KSMountain]

[quote=briansd1]Liberal progressive ideals will always win out, sooner or later. Conservatives just retard progress.[/quote]
It’s not their ideals that concern me, it’s their ideas. I think a lot of times half-baked ideas are thrown out just to “do something”. Then it becomes obvious within sometimes only a couple of years or sometimes more than that that maybe there was a reason things used to be the way they were, and maybe it wasn’t so bad after all.

Take relaxing the 20% down on home loans as an example. Or moratoriums on foreclosures as another. Or unindexed AMT as another. These were all “ideas” that turned out to be not so good. Will nationalized health care also turn out to have been something we should have been more careful about?

Actually I guess the ideals concern me too. That somehow a utopia can be created where the government ensures nothing bad can happen to anyone. Wrong.

I guess I’m doing the strawman thing here – sorry.

Using engineering terminology, to respond to your statement, I’d say if we gave the liberals their way, we’d have an underdamped society. The conservatives add a little damping to hopefully improve stability – at the cost of responsiveness.

Do you agree? Or are the conservatives literally just redneck neanderthals?

[KSMountain]

[quote=briansd1]Liberal progressive ideals will always win out, sooner or later. Conservatives just retard progress.[/quote]
It’s not their ideals that concern me, it’s their ideas. I think a lot of times half-baked ideas are thrown out just to “do something”. Then it becomes obvious within sometimes only a couple of years or sometimes more than that that maybe there was a reason things used to be the way they were, and maybe it wasn’t so bad after all.

Take relaxing the 20% down on home loans as an example. Or moratoriums on foreclosures as another. Or unindexed AMT as another. These were all “ideas” that turned out to be not so good. Will nationalized health care also turn out to have been something we should have been more careful about?

Actually I guess the ideals concern me too. That somehow a utopia can be created where the government ensures nothing bad can happen to anyone. Wrong.

I guess I’m doing the strawman thing here – sorry.

Using engineering terminology, to respond to your statement, I’d say if we gave the liberals their way, we’d have an underdamped society. The conservatives add a little damping to hopefully improve stability – at the cost of responsiveness.

Do you agree? Or are the conservatives literally just redneck neanderthals?

[Author]

Posts