Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (193555)	1/20/2007 12:11:25 PM
From: ManyMoose	Respond to of 793895

It would be expedient to do as you suggest, but not within our constitution. Probably my idea isn't either. I think we should be ruthless at deporting folks who can't live within our free society without scheming to impose their religious law on everybody. If freedom of religion isn't good enough for them, we don't need them.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (193555)	1/20/2007 12:45:54 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793895

OK, Mq, time to point out the flaws in your logic. If all Muslims are evil and deserve to die, and any Muslim who denounces his religion is an apostate who under Sharia must be killed, then all Muslims, whether or not they are Koran-renouncing apostates, will be killed. The only question is who will be doing the killing. Muslims who are apostates will be killed by their own headhackers. Muslims who are not apostates will be killed by us. If we kill all the non-renouncing Muslims, who will be left to kill the apostates? We won't since they are now OK by our standards. But they are still apostates who under Sharia deserve to die. Do they get off easy? Does it mean that we now have to do the headhackers job for them, and kill even the Muslims who renounce the Koran? Why not just kill them all? Riddle me that.