Jeanne Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 4 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: I've read major parts of the Koran in English. It's no worse than the Bible. SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Verse So does this mean that terrorists who have prisoners..keep them alive long enough to know their religion?
ERayR Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 Much has been made of Trump's style and how it does not fit with Church values. But I see no discussion about Clinton's dishonesty and corruption which IMO is much more out of sync with Church values than is Trumps lack of civility. 3
thesometimesaint Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 10 minutes ago, Jeanne said: So does this mean that terrorists who have prisoners..keep them alive long enough to know their religion? You'll have to ask the terrorists. You have to remember that it is Muslims are the biggest victims of terrorists. Myself; I don't have any use for terrorists, be they Muslim, Christian, Jew, or whatever. SEE Matthew 10:34King James Version (KJV) 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 1
Jeanne Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 Just now, thesometimesaint said: You'll have to ask the terrorists. You have to remember that it is Muslims are the biggest victims of terrorists. Myself; I don't have any use for terrorists, be they Muslim, Christian, Jew, or whatever. SEE Matthew 10:34King James Version (KJV) 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Thanks!
stemelbow Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 29 minutes ago, ERayR said: Much has been made of Trump's style and how it does not fit with Church values. But I see no discussion about Clinton's dishonesty and corruption which IMO is much more out of sync with Church values than is Trumps lack of civility. It's not just Trump's lack of civility that people have a hard time with. It feels like, and I'm probably wrong, Clinton's vices are better defended by her supporters, at least in a more reasonable way, than Trumps vices have been. Although I recognize there are certainly many who will not see any defense of Clinton's actions, much like there are some who don't see any defense of his--at least no defense worth noting.
thesometimesaint Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 3 minutes ago, stemelbow said: It's not just Trump's lack of civility that people have a hard time with. It feels like, and I'm probably wrong, Clinton's vices are better defended by her supporters, at least in a more reasonable way, than Trumps vices have been. Although I recognize there are certainly many who will not see any defense of Clinton's actions, much like there are some who don't see any defense of his--at least no defense worth noting. Not all vices are equal. I'm not going to go off on a tirade of Trumps manifest unfitness for the job. Both the two candidates are not equal. Ps. I'm not a fan of Hilary either.
stemelbow Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 2 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Not all vices are equal. I'm not going to go off on a tirade of Trumps manifest unfitness for the job. Both the two candidates are not equal. Ps. I'm not a fan of Hilary either. As far as I can gather the point of this thread is to go off on his unfitness for the job, at least from an LDS perspective. 1
waveslider Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 8 hours ago, Meadowchik said: Immigration is just a matter of course, it's a quality of human life. That's the default, the openness to those coming to our borders yearning to be free. The intervention is in controlling that to a steady, manageable state, or trying to prohibit it all together, or anything in between. Currently the US intervenes, it is not an open borders nation. In other words, people who enter do not automatically enjoy all the rights and priviliges of citizens. And of course, not all who request entry are allowed to enter. Careful control of allowed immigration is imo responsible stewardship of our federation and borders. I am a conservative, I totally agree with better localised government, including taxation shifted more locally as well as spending. That promotes the principle of us as citizens being better stewards of our government and communities. I"m not saying to stop immigration by any means. I'm all for it, but only if it is done legally. Our nation is an unofficial open border nation at the moment, ever since 2014. 8 hours ago, Meadowchik said: Careful control of allowed immigration is imo responsible stewardship of our federation and borders. I agree whole heartedly on this, unfortunately it isn't the case. right now. The border patrol are told to release any illegals they find as long the the illegals tell them that they have been here on American soil since before 2014. These illegals, which are really criminals because they break the law, don't even have to prove that they have been here that long, they just have to say that they have. This is what I mean by not needing more immigration. I think if the so called, "pro choice," (I cringe when I say that because where is the choice of the unborn human) people had those babies there would be a lot more tax payers already. Murdering them and then saying we need to import more immigrants in order to pay for a far too huge cancer of a federal government is insanity. Our federal government is so anti constitutional and so bad at spending that it should be stopped in it's tracks, the people in it should be put on trial and prosecuted and we should put another government in it's place that actually follows the constitution as the supreme law of the land, just like the Declaration Of Independence tells us we should do to a government like ours.
Guest Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 On July 31, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Calm said: Well, I can't pull in enough LDS content to justify my rant, let us just say both my husband and I see potential disaster with both candidates, but his choice is ruled by seeing internal/economic as worse while I see external/foreign as longer to heal. No matter who wins, America will lose. We should all be in prayer that both their hearts will be made right. I fear for my children and my grandchildren. I have a very good friend who being a Jew converted to Mirmonism, fears for all of his family, himself, his children and his grandchildren. He is from Alabama and his Grandpanets, parents and himself (who converted in his teenage years) who is now in his 60's, went through a lot of hate, via the "KKK", now he is more afraid. The Church must always stay neutral, but this time it does not matter. However we should tread lightly when teaching Muslims as converting them could mean a death sentence if they have radical family members. For those South of the border, we can find a field "white and ready for the harvest". This is a Nation made great by it's many cultures, and a Nation that should always be ready to love.
waveslider Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 1 hour ago, stemelbow said: It's not just Trump's lack of civility that people have a hard time with. It feels like, and I'm probably wrong, Clinton's vices are better defended by her supporters, at least in a more reasonable way, than Trumps vices have been. Although I recognize there are certainly many who will not see any defense of Clinton's actions, much like there are some who don't see any defense of his--at least no defense worth noting. There is a huge difference. While being abrasive in speech isn't good, it certainly shouldn't warrant a prison sentence, especially in a country where freedom of speech is supposed to be allowed, which unfortunately means we will hear things we don't want to hear. As far as the Clintons go, they have both been involved with many things that they should be in prison for and shouldn't by any means be allowed to make a run for the White House. It just shows how far the modern day Kind Men have infiltrated our governmental systems. 1
Meadowchik Posted August 1, 2016 Author Posted August 1, 2016 2 hours ago, stemelbow said: As far as I can gather the point of this thread is to go off on his unfitness for the job, at least from an LDS perspective. I haven't been vague about the point. There is an especially pressing need, imo, to push back against the hateful rhetoric which has enjoyed an extraordinary exposure in the form of Trump's candidacy. Whether you support him or not, you can still reject that speech and any policy founded on it.
Meadowchik Posted August 1, 2016 Author Posted August 1, 2016 3 hours ago, rodheadlee said: I'm just curious if you have read sura 9:5. Of the Quran? Did you see this post, above? "Let's assume for the moment that Islam is inherently violent at its core. I'm not saying it is, but let's do it for the sake of argument. People are born into Islam. If someone has more moderate tendencies or wants to reform it, they need to have the space and freedom to do so, without being extorted on either side, be it to violence or to absolute prohibition of Islam. We should not want a world where moderate Muslims are backed into a corner with extremists."
rodheadlee Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 (edited) An open letter: Dear Mr. Khan, I, like millions of Americans saw your speech at the DNC on Thursday night. I wish to offer my sympathy for the death of your son, Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed in action in Iraq. As a former US Army officer, and a veteran of the Gulf War, I can certainly understand the pain and anguish that you and your wife endure every day. Your son died saving the lives of his fellow soldiers. As Jesus told his disciples, according to the Gospel of John, Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Captain Khan is a hero. I am sure the soldiers he served with regard him as one. I know you and your wife do. Rest assured that millions of veterans regard your son as a hero as well. To paraphrase from the Book of Ecclesiasticus, your son’s name liveth for evermore. Your son made the ultimate sacrifice for his country, a country that was new to you and your family and one which you openly embraced and certainly love. When you and your family arrived to America from Pakistan, you assimilated into our country. You adopted American ways, learned our history and apparently you even acquired a pocket Constitution along the way. Good for you sir. But, there are many Muslims in America who not only have no desire to assimilate, but wish to live under Sharia Law. That is unacceptable to Americans. There is only one law of the land. That is the U.S. Constitution. As you well know, Mr. Khan, we live in violent times, dangerous times. Muslim madmen from ISIS and other radical Jihadi groups are on a murder and terror spree across the globe. Your religion of peace, Islam, is anything but that in 2016. That is a fact that is confirmed every time a Muslim shoots, bombs, beheads and tortures innocent men, women and children. This does not mean that every Muslim is a terrorist, but most terrorists, sir, are indeed Muslims. A Muslim terrorist attack has become the sign of the times. Regardless of what the feckless, naïve, leftist ideologue Barack Obama and his dimwitted colleagues John Kerry, Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel state, the United States and the West are at war with Radical Islam. It is the job of the president of the United States to protect his nation from all enemies; foreign and domestic. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama romanticizes Islam and refuses to accept reality, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people across the world. Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda have one goal, the complete destruction of the Judeo-Christian culture, our religions and our way of life. Many Americans have families that have been here for decades, even centuries. Many families like mine have relatives who fought in the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and Desert Storm. Some families have relatives who fought in the American Revolution. We don’t plan on letting our country be devoured by Muslim maniacs. We are Americans sir, and not unarmed, socialist European zombies. We will do what is necessary to protect the United States. While many Democrats and liberals see the world through rose colored glasses, conservatives understand that there is good and evil in this world. Evil must be destroyed before it destroys us. Strong measures, wartime measures, must be taken to protect this country from those that wish to annihilate us and our way of life. Mr. Trump’s plan to temporarily halt immigration from Muslim countries that are known to either support terrorism or harbor terrorist groups is not only pragmatic, but indeed it is constitutional. It is the constitutional duty of the president of the United States to protect this nation. There is simply no way to vet hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees from war zones like Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Europe is being destroyed because reckless leaders like Angela Merkel have opened the continent’s doors to a flood of over one million undocumented Muslims arriving with nothing more than a bad attitude and a haversack of Jihad. Do you think Americans are stupid? While the left lives in a dream world, the right does not. Mr. Trump understands the threat to his nation and the threat, sir, is not from Swedish Lutherans named Anna and Lars. The threat, sir, is from radical Islam. How in God’s name are U.S. immigration authorities supposed to know the true intentions of a 22-year-old Syrian man? It is impossible. You know it is impossible. How in God’s name are U.S. immigration authorities supposed to know the true intentions of hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees and thousands of other sundry Muslims who wish to arrive on our shores? It is impossible. You know it is impossible. Whether you, your wife, the Muslim world and millions of Democrats are offended by Mr. Trump’s realistic view of the world is irrelevant. Whether you, your wife and son would have been prohibited from emigrating from Pakistan to America under Mr. Trump’s wartime plan is irrelevant. The security of this great land supersedes your desires and the desires of others who wish to come here now. The United States of America has no obligation to open its doors in order to placate foreigners and liberals in our government. To adopt any other course but Mr. Trump’s would be a cause for further endangering the lives of Americans every day. That, sir, is unacceptable. You attacked Mr. Trump in front of a worldwide audience, yet you can’t understand the fact that he defends himself against attacks from you, Hillary Clinton and the left. What else is one to do sir? We must live in a world of reality, not a world of denial, delusion and fantasy the Democrats inhabit every waking day of their lives. Radical Islam is the enemy of everyone on this planet who believes in freedom and justice. Until it is destroyed, this nation must protect itself from enemies both foreign and domestic. Sincerely, Ray Starmann Ray Starmann is the founder of US Defense Watch Edited August 1, 2016 by rodheadlee 3
Calm Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 It is not true that most terrorists are Muslims: http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-muslims-carried-out-more-than-90-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html 2
ERayR Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 5 hours ago, Meadowchik said: I haven't been vague about the point. There is an especially pressing need, imo, to push back against the hateful rhetoric which has enjoyed an extraordinary exposure in the form of Trump's candidacy. Whether you support him or not, you can still reject that speech and any policy founded on it. IMNSHO the pressing need is to squelch the criminal corruption as manifest in the Clinton's.
rodheadlee Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 (edited) 44 minutes ago, Calm said: It is not true that most terrorists are Muslims: http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-muslims-carried-out-more-than-90-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html Those stats in the US on the daily beast are counting gang warfare as terrorist attacks. Drive by shootings in gang territory are a completely different motive and method. You will never see a Latino gangbanger go into a church and kill a priest or open up on a bunch of people in swimsuits at the beach.Innocents may get caught in the crossfire but they are not shooting them on purpose. The Cartels and gangs are more like the Gaddianton robbers they are not using terrorism as a political statement. Many of those people are here illegally and need to be sent home too. Edited August 2, 2016 by rodheadlee 1
strappinglad Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 This question is simply for information as I don't know what the procedures are, not because I hope for any such situation arising . Suppose, in October say, one of the current candidates comes down with a serious and debilitating illness. Does the party of the candidate then forfeit the election? Could another candidate hurriedly be chosen? How would the supposedly already printed ballots be fixed up ? Would the vice presidential candidate be next in line as the new candidate? Has this scenario ever happened before in US history?
rodheadlee Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 14 minutes ago, Calm said: And FBI stats? I have not had a chance to look at them yet. I'm going to L.A. for back surgery.
rodheadlee Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/08/01/isis-details-why-hate-in-new-magazine.html Yeah, I know, it's Fox news but it doesn't make it false.
Calm Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 Sorry to hear about that. Don't worry about it on my account. Please only look at them if you want to.
rodheadlee Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 Just now, Calm said: Sorry to hear about that. Don't worry about it on my account. Please only look at them if you want to. Don't be sorry. I'm really happy. I have been waiting for this for a long, long time. 1
Calm Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 One of those! Much better that out of the blue. Here is hoping all goes very, very well.
sunstoned Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 22 hours ago, waveslider said: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/policy-force-border-patrol-agents/2016/02/04/id/712787/ Thank you. This is an interesting read. I was unaware of this.
RevTestament Posted August 2, 2016 Posted August 2, 2016 19 hours ago, Meadowchik said: Let's assume for the moment that Islam is inherently violent at its core. I'm not saying it is, but let's do it for the sake of argument. People are born into Islam. If someone has more moderate tendencies or wants to reform it, they need to have the space and freedom to do so, without being extorted on either side, be it to violence or to absolute prohibition of Islam. We should not want a world where moderate Muslims are backed into a corner with extremists. We've invited Tunisian Muslims to live here and he's renovated the pool room into a studio and does our gardening in return for living there. He also looks out for us, as we have a tenant who is pretty scary. He's visited our ward, but is still practicing his faith with his wife. He calls Jesus a prophet and we have that in common in addition to many other values. Our ward has several immigrant member families who will be out of a home tomorrow because their grace period ends, thus by French law the Church may no longer help them pay their rent. They also cannot get jobs until their status is resolved. They also cannot go back to their country of origin because it is too dangerous. The process for them is taking long in part because of the anti-Muslim sentiment over immigration, which is making caseloads heavier and slower. Lots of people are suffering as a result, not just Muslims or others. Well you are in France, correct? I know a humble family from Tonga who overstayed their visa here in the United States, and waited over 10 years to become citizens... What took them so long? Should they be forced to wait while Muslim refugees get a free ride? I don't think so. I am not for alienating moderate Muslims. but when I watch videos of Muslims raising their hands to questions in their mosques, I begin to wonder if there really are any moderate muslims. It seems they would all support the death penalty for cartoonists who lampoon Mohammed. I believe the only way for Muslims to truly become enlightened is to convert to Christianity - without threat of death, but rather for love of God. I think the best policy is if in doubt let an oil rich Muslim country provide them aid. I think I would rather have open borders to drug lords than Muslims. I notice you ignored my point about Muslims here who already want Sharia Law. Are we just going to turn our backs to it and let them ignore our laws? Then we are no longer a country of justice... That is when the constitution will really hang by a thread.
Recommended Posts