Are you against Christian Sharia Law?

@Renaldo Dubois,

Boobie you're falling back on old retorts---the sure sign of a limited perspective--maybe you should remove your head from your ass and look around a little.---Broaden your horizon.

1 Reply

@raprap,

Don't they have moderators around here to control the trolls?

2 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

That be me dude, I'm here to confront trolls who repeatedly ask questions like "Are you still beating your wife?'"

0 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

How dare you accuse my family of voting against the human rights of Americans. You don't have anything to establish that.

Being that I view it as a human rights issue, yes, I believe that would be correct. It's not just your family that voted this way. It's not particularly special to me that they voted this way. There are lots of people who voted this way.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You're indoctrination is kicking in again. This has nothing to do with "human rights".

I've asked for you to define what makes something qualify as a human rights issue. The sooner you answer this question, the sooner we can discuss the merit of your claim.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

If it does, then the NAACP is guilty of human rights abuses. When are they going to be charged?

The NAACP voted for Prop 8? Charged for what?

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Another point is this.

Grammar correction: This is a sentence fragment. Given the following statement, perhaps you meant to use a comma, or a colon? A simple mistake, I'm sure.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Are blacks supposed to vote the way the NAACP tells them to?

Black people are free to vote as they please. I brought you an article by the NAACP because they are better than either you or I to possibly give light to why this specific community voted in such a way on Prop 8.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I think those days are coming to an end, especially after the first black President has been such a failure.

Mediocre at times, but failure Obama is not. I doubt the sentiment of the black community views Obama as a failure.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You did make that claim earlier.

I did not make any such claim.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You said the way it was written could have confused people.

Correct.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

In other words, they're too dumb to figure it out.

Incorrect. As I said, perfectly normal and intelligent people can be deceived.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You really should cease the racist BS.

Even if I did say that made a person dumb, it wouldn't have anything to do with race. Non-black people voted yes on prop 8 as well. I'm critical of all people who voted for Prop 8, not any specific group of people who voted yes. I've not claimed that the black community is less intelligent.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Another thing you should do is find your info from more reasonable sources. Those left wing sites are full of indoctrination. You're probably so indoctrinated you don't even notice it.

I understand that you feel my information sources are biased. I also understand that you feel that I'm politically "indoctrinated." I believe the same about your sources and your sensibilities.

How would you convinced me that your sources aren't biased, and that you aren't indoctrinated? If you don't care, why should I?

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I noticed it right away with the term "equal marriage rights", which translates into equal rights for gays.

I'm fine with either terminology. Equal rights for homosexuals is the end goal and that includes marriage rights--Absolutely.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

How about we give brothers and sisters the right to marry if they want to. Who are we to stop them if they love each other. Why do you deny them their equal rights? You big meanie.

It won't effect me so why should I care? If they consent, what does it matter?

A
R
T

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Don't they have moderators around here to control the trolls?

Moderators on the boards do not control user content, they help the board by looking for hazardous links and monitoring any users who try and use the boards for commercial or unsolicited advertising, etc.

The community self polices threads and deals with trolls in many ways. A common way trolls are addressed is that their posts are voted down. Often, some users simply get put on ignore by individual users.

A
R
T

0 Replies

@failures art,

The definition of a "rights" issue falls on you. You are the one making the claim. It's a state issue. Always has been. It is not a "civil rights" issue.
Making something legal doesn't make it a "right". Driving a car is not a "right", although it is legal. You really need to learn your definitions. Read your Declaration of Independence. The one you don't believe.

1 Reply

@failures art,

You're lying again. You really need to work on that. First you said that perhaps the ballot was poorly written so the voters didn't understand it. That's a paraphrase, but that is what you said. I hate liars.

1 Reply

I thought this was interesting.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/naming_your_baby_the_muslim_wa.html

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Sounds like the 'American Thinker" would condemn "Crazy Horse" or "Sitting Bull" simply for their names. Sounds like American Thinkers don't consider religion or culture worthy of individual freedom or the constitution as you are prone to whine.

BTW I know a child named Gabriel (the angel of death), and I had two great aunts named Chastity and Providence, which were both considered proper names.

Oh well, according to "New Amerikan Thinkers" like you they aren't proper 'Merican names like Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice and aunts Chastity and Providence are burning in Xtian hell. Hell must be waiting for Gabe too.

Rap

1 Reply

@raprap,

So you're okay with having Sharia Law in the USA?

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

No I'm not.

You can't legislate morality regardless of the religious dogma it attaches itself to.

2 Replies

@raprap,

Sharia Law says if you are an infidel (that's you)and meet a muslim on the sidewalk then you have to step into the gutter and lower your head while you pass each other. You're okay with that? After all you wouldn't want to legislate against his religion now would you.

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Jim Crow laws were enacted in this country for almost a century--laws enacted by gawd fearing southern Xtians (for the most part) targeting people simply because of race.

Were they right then? (no)

Were they effectively Sharia? (yes)

1 Reply

@raprap,

How does a society arrive at a morality or what is a society like which has none?

A glance at a decent lawyer's bookshelves will provide an insight into how much morality has been legislated and the historical process which produced it was a Christian one.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Hopefully we're moving away from morality in the form of 'blue laws' to those aimed at the protection of the powerless victims. The problem with moral based legislation, is that morals change as culture changes.

Unfortunately enacted laws do not go away--moral based laws still remain--you cannot still be arrested or beating your children with a wooden rod bigger than your thumb, but in many states that attorney's library still contains that code.

Rap

0 Replies

@raprap,

You didn't respond to my post. We are not talking about 150 years ago. We are talking about Sharia Law in the USA.

So are you ready to step off the sidewalk and walk in the gutter with your head lowered as you pass a muslim, Mr. Infidel?

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Your history is as flawed as your babble, boobie. I grew up in South Carolina, Jim Crow laws existed when I was a teenager and I'm not a hundred and fifty years old.

1 Reply

@raprap,

That's nice. Are you going to respond to my question or not?

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

The definition of a "rights" issue falls on you. You are the one making the claim.

I don't mind presenting a number of definitions that I agree with. Here is one:

"The basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled, often held to include the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression, and equality before the law."

I believe you have some sort of alternate definition. I would like to see what makes something a human rights issue to you. You don't believe that equal marriage rights qualifies, so I'd like to see you you logically justify that exclusion.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

It's a state issue. Always has been.

In some aspects, but the EPC and FFC are federal constitutional mandates.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

It is not a "civil rights" issue.

Well, provide your definition, and then we can discuss the merits of your argument. I believe it is a matter of civil rights based on unequal application of the law.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Making something legal doesn't make it a "right". Driving a car is not a "right", although it is legal. You really need to learn your definitions.

Correct, driving a car is not a right, but if a law appeared that banned one group from being able to drive a car, it would bee an issue of rights because of an unequal application of the law.

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Read your Declaration of Independence. The one you don't believe.

I do believe and I'm fond of the Declaration of Independence. It, however, is not a governing legal document in our country. The governing legal document in the USA is the Constitution.

A
R
T

1 Reply

Are you against Christian Sharia Law?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know