An example of
muslim assimilation into American life.
Would you be able to recognize her in a line-up?
http://www.local6.com/news/1214015/detail.html
From page one:
Quote:]f American citizens (this includes Ellison) don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration (Ellison is not an immigrant) there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran (a reference to Ellison) ," the letter reads. "I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies (which has nothing to do with Ellison since he is not an immigrant) that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America (Ahhh, now we get to the point. It's not about Ellison being an immigrant, it's that he isn't a Christian like us REAL Americans.) and to prevent our resources from being swamped."
Hence, my statement that Goode is off his rocker thinking only Christian Americans can hold office. He's a bigot. He tried to cover it all up with immigration and fear of them terrorist muslims flowing into the good ol USA, but what is at the heart of the letter is that Ellison wants to be sworn in on the Koran rather than the Bible, and Goode sees that as an affront to the traditional values and beliefs (Christianity) of the US.
The immigrant part is just to throw you off and make you fearful.
Looks like it works for some.
Re: Bigot
okie wrote:Hmmmmm. If all the Muslims also believe in freedom of religion and the Bill of Rights, great. I am not so sure they all do....
Not all Christians believe in freedom of religion. Ever had one refuse to leave your door step?
Again, the fear mongering about muslim immigrants isn't an issue, and it isn't THE issue for Goode. It's whether or not Ellison is allowed to be sworn in with his hand on the Koran, rather than the Bible.
squinney wrote:Just admit you can't f*ckin read.
I never said Goode said it. I said he (Goode) is off his rocker thinking only Christian Americans can hold office.
Gawd! I'm damn near impossible to rile, but your inability to comprehend what is posted here, over and over again, is nerve racking.
"If i can pi$$ off one tight a$$ liberal a day, I've got 'r dun"
Larry the cable Guy
Let's look at the bright side of this... the people who agree with Okie and Madam make up (as best as I can see it) about 25% - 30 % of the American voting population-- and (with a few strange exceptions_ are all Conservative white Christians...
People like our Congressmen Goode are systematically insulting every possible subtype of American -- They are seemingly going out their way to insult the vast number of African Americans, Latinos, homosexuals and non-Christians.
Better yet they are insulting all of these groups as Republicans. And, of course Republican is the key word.
Even better they are making statements that are outrageous enough to make the front page of newspapers-- and they are loudly refusing to apologize for statements that offend large numbers of voters.
Strangely just a few years ago, many Arab Americans-- being socially conservative, were pretty solid Republican voters (and conservative Republican voters at that). Now this will go. Similar things are happening with the Latino vote.
If you don't believe that statements like this have an effect-- just ask a Repbulican what a Macaca is...
So, if you care about another Democratic electoral romp in 2008, we should all thank God for Goode (and okie and LoneStarMadam).
True, ebrown. Very true.
LSM- I was riled by your inability to read. If that's something in which you want to take pride, go for it. From here on you're on "ignore."
squinney wrote:True, ebrown. Very true.
LSM- I was riled by your inability to read. If that's something in which you want to take pride, go for it. From here on you're on "ignore."
I can read, but when I think someone is accusing another of something, i have the right to ask & that's what you got riled about.
I don't mind being put on ignore, that's fine if all you want to debate are others with your own mind set. Pretty boring, I'd think.
ebrown_p wrote:Let's look at the bright side of this... the people who agree with Okie and Madam make up (as best as I can see it) about 25% - 30 % of the American voting population-- and (with a few strange exceptions_ are all Conservative white Christians...
People like our Congressmen Goode are systematically insulting every possible subtype of American -- They are seemingly going out their way to insult the vast number of African Americans, Latinos, homosexuals and non-Christians.
Better yet they are insulting all of these groups as Republicans. And, of course Republican is the key word.
Even better they are making statements that are outrageous enough to make the front page of newspapers-- and they are loudly refusing to apologize for statements that offend large numbers of voters.
Strangely just a few years ago, many Arab Americans-- being socially conservative, were pretty solid Republican voters (and conservative Republican voters at that). Now this will go. Similar things are happening with the Latino vote.
If you don't believe that statements like this have an effect-- just ask a Repbulican what a Macaca is...
So, if you care about another Democratic electoral romp in 2008, we should all thank God for Goode (and okie and LoneStarMadam).
You may have more credibility if your opinions were not so transparently partisen towards the Democratic Party.
You make it sound as if there never was a Democrat who did not "offend" someone.
Seems to me you are actually the bigot in the crowd with your constant anti-christians rantings.
Merry christmas!
OMG, there is another out there that sees through the facade.
ebrown_p wrote:Let's look at the bright side of this... the people who agree with Okie and Madam make up (as best as I can see it) about 25% - 30 % of the American voting population-- and (with a few strange exceptions_ are all Conservative white Christians...
People like our Congressmen Goode are systematically insulting every possible subtype of American -- They are seemingly going out their way to insult the vast number of African Americans, Latinos, homosexuals and non-Christians.
Better yet they are insulting all of these groups as Republicans. And, of course Republican is the key word.
Even better they are making statements that are outrageous enough to make the front page of newspapers-- and they are loudly refusing to apologize for statements that offend large numbers of voters.
Strangely just a few years ago, many Arab Americans-- being socially conservative, were pretty solid Republican voters (and conservative Republican voters at that). Now this will go. Similar things are happening with the Latino vote.
If you don't believe that statements like this have an effect-- just ask a Repbulican what a Macaca is...
So, if you care about another Democratic electoral romp in 2008, we should all thank God for Goode (and okie and LoneStarMadam).
What we have here is a huge group of people living in a state of denial. That is that religious background has had no influence on our culture, our laws, our rights, our society. This debate is hopeless with such people.
As long as this huge group is over 51% of the electorate.... I will be fine with that.
BTW You guys use the term "partisan Democrat" is if it were a bad thing.
LoneStarMadam wrote:squinney wrote:Just admit you can't f*ckin read.
I never said Goode said it. I said he (Goode) is off his rocker thinking only Christian Americans can hold office.
Gawd! I'm damn near impossible to rile, but your inability to comprehend what is posted here, over and over again, is nerve racking.
"If i can pi$$ off one tight a$$ liberal a day, I've got 'r dun"
Larry the cable Guy
let's see... if squinney is a liberal and therefore a tight ass.... and you poride yourself on being the opposite of squinney..... does that mean any of us could drive an 18 wheeler in and out of your ass if our constitutions were strong enough?
Bear
Bear, goodie goodie, can I watch?
BBB
Fire up that truck, bear.
LSM has already stated that she doesn't use cosmoline, KY, or vasoline.
okie wrote:
What we have here is a huge group of people living in a state of denial. That is that religious background has had no influence on our culture, our laws, our rights, our society. This debate is hopeless with such people.
Religious intolerance has had a large influence on our laws and rights. The main influence being that government isn't supposed to be involved in it and dictate what how people practice their religion. Goode is living in denial. Anyone that supports him is also in denial.
Muslim group seeks apology from Va. congressman
Posted on Wed, Dec. 20, 2006
Muslim group seeks apology from Va. congressman
By Rob Hotakainen
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON - A Muslim group is asking Virginia Republican Rep. Virgil Goode Jr. to apologize after he told hundreds of his constituents that more Muslims will follow Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, D-Minn., to Congress if strict immigration laws aren't passed.
"The Muslim representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran," Goode wrote.
The letter was written to constituents who contacted Goode after Ellison said he planned to bring his Quran, the Muslim holy book, with him when he takes the oath of office on Jan. 4.
In his letter, Goode said: "When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way."
Goode, an attorney and former state senator who was first elected to Congress in 1996, said he wants to "stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country."
"I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped," Goode wrote.
Corey Saylor, national legislative director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Goode's "Islamophobic remarks send a message of intolerance that is unworthy of anyone elected to public office."
CAIR officials noted that Ellison traces his family roots in the United States back to 1742.
"There can be no reasonable defense for such bigotry," Saylor said, adding that Goode should apologize.
Linwood Duncan, Goode's press secretary, said Goode sent the letter to hundreds of constituents who contacted his office after Ellison disclosed his plans. At about the same time, the head of the local Sierra Club contacted Goode about a different issue, and the letter was accidentally sent to him in response. The Sierra Club official gave a copy of the letter to a reporter.
"The congressman is not apologizing," Duncan said. "He stands by the letter."
John Cruickshank, the Sierra Club official from Earlysville, Va., said he was "deeply offended" when he received the letter from Goode. He said he's in regular contact with Goode on environmental issues.
"I wasn't sure it was authentic at first," Cruickshank said of the letter. "I was pretty shocked by it." He said he wrote a letter back to Goode, saying he had shown intolerance and disrespect for Muslims.
Ellison couldn't be reached for comment.
ebrown_p wrote:As long as this huge group is over 51% of the electorate.... I will be fine with that.
BTW You guys use the term "partisan Democrat" is if it were a bad thing.
I haven't figured ebrown out, except that he or she is a very partisan liberal Democrat on most issues, so the blinders seem to be on when any reason is applied to issues like this.
Concerning the issue of Muslims in America or in other countries, it touches on a bit broader subject, which I would try to point out as follows:
What about communists and dictators that use free societies and free and open elections to sometimes win elections in some countries, only to later end freedom and free elections so that they can stay in power?
What about terrorists that come to free countries and enjoy all the benefits of a free society, including excellent higher education opportunites, only to hate the country they have adopted, and some try to change or destroy that same country?
What about religions that use freedom of religion to practice their religion, but if in the majority in some countries, freedom of religion is disallowed by their religion as instituted by the political system there?
At the risk of repeating the obvious, Americans should not be opposed to anyone practicing their religious beliefs, as that is a basic principle here. The fear on the part of some that might be construed as bigotry, is simply the fear that if Muslims ever became in the majority, they could choose to end the very freedom that allowed them to worship as they choose. The same principle applies to communism. Communists are free to run for office, however the fear exists that if ever the public is duped into voting a dictator into office, and if enough public support existed, that same freedom would allow a government to end the freedom for all, based on the wishes of democratic majority rule.
All of this points out the importance of the constitution and adherence to principles instead of majority public opinion.
Quote:The fear on the part of some that might be construed as bigotry, is simply the fear that if Muslims ever became in the majority, they could choose to end the very freedom that allowed them to worship as they choose. The same principle applies to communism. Communists are free to run for office, however the fear exists that if ever the public is duped into voting a dictator into office, and if enough public support existed, that same freedom would allow a government to end the freedom for all, based on the wishes of democratic majority rule.
That would be a good example of bigotry okie. Just because you don't like someone is not evidence they want to destroy your way of life. There is no evidence that muslims in America, Keith Ellision in particular. want to end freedom of worship for anyone. It is bigotry to say they are trying to do such a thing.
I reject your accusation of bigotry. I am not opposed to anyone practicing any religion as long as they are law abiding. I am simply expressing a concern that all of our freedoms could be in jeopardy if certain political beliefs and religious beliefs ever become the majority. We are nowhere near that of course, but I am simply looking at what might be coming over the horizon to wonder if it is a healthy trend or not. Because I express a concern for the future is certainly not bigotry. Am I bigoted because I disagree with you?
Another thing, just because I disagree with someone does not mean I don't like them. This is another ploy used by some on your side of the fence, Parados, and it is a very shallow argument.
