26
   

Are you against Christian Sharia Law?

 
 
parados
 
  4  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 11:48 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I've already shown which sentence you purposely omitted. I can't help it if you're stupid.

But the sentence you showed wasn't omitted.

Your original post
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I disagree. The answer to debt is never more debt. When you raise taxes on citizens then you are effectively reducing their buying power. That is some stinking thinking. When I can't meet my budget, I have to cut. No one has the luxury of just automatically lifting their income by demanding more money. That's not how the world works. Only in liberal la la land does it work like that.

http://able2know.org/topic/170607-15#post-4581994

The reply in which you claim the sentence was omitted.
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I disagree. The answer to debt is never more debt.


Raising taxes doesn't add to the debt; it lowers the deficit. This is a fact, not a theory.

Quote:
When you raise taxes on citizens then you are effectively reducing their buying power. That is some stinking thinking. When I can't meet my budget, I have to cut.


Raising your taxes by a few percentage points doesn't mean you have to cut your budget by any serious amount. You are Appealing to Extremes here.

Quote:
No one has the luxury of just automatically lift their income by demanding more money. That's not how the world works. Only in liberal la la land does it work like that.


This is a horrible analogy, but from what I can tell, it's a struggle for you to even put a couple sentences together without both making a fool of yourself and resulting to childish outbursts, so why would I be surprised by that?

Cycloptichorn

http://able2know.org/topic/170607-15#post-4581996


Here.. let me make it easy for you
You posted 71 words.
Cyc quoted you in 3 sections: 10 words + 29 words + 32 words
So Cyc quoted 71 words.
The exact same words you wrote and every single one of them. He didn't miss any of them. So... now you can continue to argue but anyone that wants to can check the 2 posts and find out you are acting like a 2 year old.
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 11:49 am
"you will receive only silence from me"

Those are your words. Liar.
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 11:49 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Why do you repeat what you hear? Are you a parrot?
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 11:51 am
@parados,
Poor baby. You keep thrashing around like a flounder. You're beginning to stink up the boat.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  5  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 11:51 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
I read the posts by myself, but can't afford paying someone who reads them loud for me.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  4  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 11:54 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

"you will receive only silence from me"

Those are your words. Liar.


You just edited out part of my sentence - the very thing you accused me of being a coward for doing. Very Trollish behavior.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  4  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 12:05 pm
@parados,
The dude has been revealed as nothing more than the most pathetic of trolls, an H2O or MassoGato level of troll. I think I will indeed begin to refer to him as his actual name of Possum, and I suggest you do the same.

Cycloptichorn
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 12:07 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Man, this is fun. You sure are ranting and flailing around a lot for someone who said they were going to be silent towards me. Just can't help yourself. Have you ever thought of psychological help for your inability to do what you say?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 12:16 pm
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Man, this is fun. You sure are ranting and flailing around a lot for someone who said they were going to be silent towards me. Just can't help yourself. Have you ever thought of psychological help for your inability to do what you say?

Ding Dong, the witch is dead...
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  4  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 03:18 pm
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

The mosque has nothing to do with civil liberties.

Sure it does. If the Cordoba Project files all it's paperwork properly, they cannot be denied their building permit because they are Muslims. This is exactly what conservatives like Newt Gingrich tried to do.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

The majority of the American people don't want it built on that site.

Building permits are not a matter of popular opinion. I wonder how many of your claimed "majority" are fully briefed on the facts about Park51? I suspect they are not. It is unreasonable to deny them from building in their own community on a location that is not even at ground zero (as it was sold to the public).

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You're agenda is against the will of the American people. You are the enemy within.

I'm just defending the individual's freedom of religion. If that puts me at odds with any number of people, they are free to petition their Representatives and Senators to amend the constitution and have the freedom of religion removed. Then, I'll have lost, if that's what you so desire.

A
R
T
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -4  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 09:09 am
@failures art,
This has nothing to do with freeedom of religion. That's where you fall into the ditch. Once you get past that lie then you'll be able to see clearly. You're stupid.
parados
 
  5  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 10:32 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

This has nothing to do with freeedom of religion. That's where you fall into the ditch. Once you get past that lie then you'll be able to see clearly. You're stupid.

You're not in Kansas anymore.
failures art
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 10:40 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

This has nothing to do with freeedom of religion.

Sure it does. Preventing people from building based solely on their religion is a direct violation. Newt et al tried, but failed to do exactly this.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

That's where you fall into the ditch.

An odd metaphor. What does it mean?

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Once you get past that lie then you'll be able to see clearly.

I'm 20/20 on this. Since you already conceded many pages back on the matter on secular government, I didn't think we needed to go over this again. Tell me what you're confused about, and maybe I can clarify.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You're stupid.

That's not very kind, but I understand you're frustrated and having difficulty expressing your feelings on the topic. I won't hold it against you.

A
R
T
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 10:43 am
@parados,
And who exactly is behind the curtain? That's the question you lefties can't answer honestly. Why? Who is behind the building of the mosque near GZ and what are his "religious" views?
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 10:48 am
@failures art,
No, it's not unkind. You've been calling me stupid from day one around here. So it looks like you're unkind also. Since we've got that settled, I hope you can grow into presenting an argument based on religioius rights in the US Constitution. Let's see if you can do that.

No one is preventing muslims from exercising their religious rights. Building a mosque is a matter of zoning. You can't build a church anywhere you want to. The citizens who run the government and make up zoning laws can accept or deny whatever they want to. That has nothing to do with preventing a religion from exercising their religious rights. It has to do with building permits. I think there are over a hundred mosques in NYC or close to it.

That's why you're stupid to expect anyone to believe this has to do with "religious freedom".

We already know you're gonna chop this up because you don't have the intelligence to post a complete thought like I just did in rebuttal. Another example of your stupidity. Show us all that I'm wrong about you.
failures art
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 10:51 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

And who exactly is behind the curtain?

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, and he is not behind a curtain.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

That's the question you lefties can't answer honestly. Why?

Answered.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Who is behind the building of the mosque near GZ and what are his "religious" views?

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, and he is a Muslim.

Not that it matters. A person's religious or political beliefs are not material to their legal right to build.

You should go to the factcheck.org entry on park51 and familiarize yourself with the facts on the project.

FACTCHECK

A
R
T
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 10:56 am
@failures art,
Thanks for proving my opinion of your posting is right on.

His religious views certainly are material. What if his religious views are to demand our public schools teach Arabic instead of making it a choice?

Do you consider that "religous views"?

Are you going to allow the Aryan Nations to build a headquarters right next to the NAACP headquarters because of their freedom of "religious views"? You're stupid.
failures art
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 11:08 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

No, it's not unkind. You've been calling me stupid from day one around here. So it looks like you're unkind also.

You're mistaken. I've not called you stupid. Not even once. You can link me to a post where I have, and I'll apologize. Otherwise, all accept your withdraw on this in advance. You must be confused.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Since we've got that settled, I hope you can grow into presenting an argument based on religioius rights in the US Constitution. Let's see if you can do that.

The first amendment provides for religious freedom and the Equal protection clause provides the basis such that government services and laws are applied equally to all groups. The Muslim community wanting to build filed their paperwork properly, and so like any other group, they have the right to build.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

No one is preventing muslims from exercising their religious rights. Building a mosque is a matter of zoning. You can't build a church anywhere you want to.

The building they are going to build in does not violate any zoning such that they can't build there.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

The citizens who run the government and make up zoning laws can accept or deny whatever they want to.

Incorrect. They can deny people who file improperly, or their building design is unsafe, etc. They cannot discriminate on the basis of religion. you are incorrect. I'm glad I could help you understand this.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

That has nothing to do with preventing a religion from exercising their religious rights. It has to do with building permits.

It does have to do with building permits, and conservatives who attempted to obstruct Park51 failed to rezone the building as a means to obstruct the community's legal right to build there.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I think there are over a hundred mosques in NYC or close to it.

Plenty of churches too. What's the relevance?

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

That's why you're stupid to expect anyone to believe this has to do with "religious freedom".

All religions must have religious freedom, otherwise, none do. That's why I, a non-Muslim, must ethically defend their rights. Christians need to understand they don't get special privileges to deny others the same rights they enjoy.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

We already know you're gonna chop this up because you don't have the intelligence to post a complete thought like I just did in rebuttal.

Separating your posts is the best way to address your statements in the most detail. I don't know about your post being a complete thought though. I've had to provide so much information to you on Park51. How can you have a complete thought with incomplete information?

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Another example of your stupidity.

I'm just being thorough. If you believe your posting method is so superior, it has failed you a number of times to fully address the questions presented to you. Maybe you should reconsider.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Show us all that I'm wrong about you.

Who is this "us" you keep referring to? It's a peculiar thing to say.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 11:14 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Thanks for proving my opinion of your posting is right on.

I validated your feelings about me?

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

His religious views certainly are material. What if his religious views are to demand our public schools teach Arabic instead of making it a choice?

What if they are? How is this material to a building permit? We don't ask what a church's politics are when they file to build a new building.

If a group has these kinds of views, they are welcome to petition the public to make these changes. I doubt they will be accepted. Either way, it makes no matter on them filing a building permit.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Do you consider that "religous views"?

Technically, those are political views, but neither are material to building permits.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Are you going to allow the Aryan Nations to build a headquarters right next to the NAACP headquarters because of their freedom of "religious views"?

Yes. If they file their paperwork, it's not a issue of popularity. It would be an abuse of power to deny them access. The NAACP would probably agree even if they hated their neighbor.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You're stupid.

You find any posts where I said this to you yet? If not, I guess I'm accepting another concession from you.

A
R
T
Renaldo Dubois
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 11:24 am
@failures art,
You can't seem to get past being dishonest in your first reply. Opinions are not feelings. You're a pretty confused little twit.

And thanks once again for proving my point. I stated that this has nothing to do with "religious freedom". There are numerous mosques in NYC. You have no point. It's all about location and exactly what that means. That is what you will not face. That is where you bend over for Islam, and that is where you fall into the ditch.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 08:46:34