Fandom Forums

Fandom Forums (http://www.fandom.com/forums//index.php)
-   World News (http://www.fandom.com/forums//forumdisplay.php?f=169)
-   -   Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?" (http://www.fandom.com/forums//showthread.php?t=72825)

kael03 07-19-2011 12:30 AM

Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/h...152052930.html

Quote:

Presidential hopeful Herman Cain on Sunday sided with communities that want to ban mosques, saying Americans have a right to oppose the construction of places of Islamic worship.

During a discussion on "Fox News Sunday" of a proposed mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn. that has drawn protests, legal challenges and even arson, host Chris Wallace asked the former Godfather's Pizza CEO his feelings about communities that wish to ban mosques.

"Yes, they have the right to do that," Cain replied.

Last week, Cain, who is Christian, referred to the planned Murfreesboro mosque as an "infringement and an abuse of our freedom of religion" during interviews with reporters at a campaign stop in Murfreesboro. There, the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro is planning to build a new, larger facility to accommodate its growing congregation.

Cain and others believe leaders at this mosque are trying to force Islamic extremism upon the community. "I don't agree with what's happening because this isn't an innocent mosque," Cain said.

Cain repeated that argument Sunday, adding during his Fox interview that he's generally opposed to Islam.

"Our Constitution guarantees separation of church and state. Islam combines church and state," Cain said Sunday. "They're objecting to the fact that Islam is both a religion and a set of laws," Cain said of the opponents.
When asked if his beliefs constitute discrimination, Cain disagreed, saying: "I am willing to take a harder look at people that might be terrorists. That's what I'm saying."

Cain provoked questions about discrimination earlier this year when he said that he would not be comfortable appointing a Muslim to his cabinet or as a federal judge if elected.

Cain told Fox host Glenn Beck in June that he would appoint Muslims who pledged loyalty to the U.S. Constitution--and conceded that we would not require the same pledge from believers who have faced past charges of divided loyalties in U.S. politics, such as Catholics.
Tl;dr: Black Republican (lolwut?) sided with communities that were trying to ban the construction of Mosques. His excuse: "they might be terrorists." Apparently the part of the Constitution that states "Freedom of Religion" doesn't mean anything.

Some of the comments are astounding with their ignorance. One person actually tried to claim the preamble of the Constitution stated that the United States was formed for Christianity alone, to which a person with sense posted the actual preamble and told that user to learn to read.

kluang 07-19-2011 01:06 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
God this guy is so bias and stupid.

Numinous 07-19-2011 06:22 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
So one Republican presidential candidate wants to ban porn and take away rights from the LGBT community, and another wants to ban Islam by trampling the First Amendment and resorting to incredibly stupid stereotypes.

Obama didn't even had to take care of bin Laden to guarantee his reelection, the opposition is already doing a fine job by themselves!

RNB 07-19-2011 08:59 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Wait, who wants to ban porn?

Numinous 07-19-2011 09:03 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RNB (Post 1957875)
Wait, who wants to ban porn?

Michele Bachmann. She made the pledge some crazy wackos made to ban porn and downgrade the LGBT because "they're threats to public health".

kluang 07-19-2011 09:05 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Another Republican candidate. Female. Not Sarah Palin

Quote:

"they're threats to public health"
For her, porn is bad, gay is good.

Or something like that

Numinous 07-19-2011 09:20 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kluang (Post 1957877)
For her, porn is bad, gay is good.

Or something like that

See the pledge for yourself.

Or, if you feel lazy, I'll quote the most pertinent part:

Quote:

- Vigorous opposition to any redefinition of the Institution of Marriage – faithful monogamy between one man and one woman – through statutory-, bureaucratic-, or court-imposed recognition of unions which are bigamous, polygamous, polyandrous, same-sex, etc.
So she's against porn AND gays.

Mal 07-19-2011 09:57 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
I'm sure those beliefs often come as a package deal, since most with religious reasons against one will also have religious reasons against the other.

ACt 07-19-2011 10:04 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
I agree, let's ban Islam. And while we're at it, take out Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Chinese Traditional Religion, Paganism (ancient and neo forms like the rebirth of Wicca), Sikhism, Juche, Spiritism, Baha'i, Jainism, Shinto, Cao Dai, Zoroastrianism, Tenrikyo, Unitarian-Universalism, Rastafarianism and Scientology.

Remove all the structure from these things and we might be able to find some common ground as a race of humans rather than endless derivations and sects.

Also, all you need know about Michelle Bachmann.

kluang 07-19-2011 10:25 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Quote:

Also, all you need know about Michelle Bachmann.
Well, doesn't the republican have someone else as their candidate? C'mon even Arnie have better resume then her

RNB 07-19-2011 11:21 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Just a question, referring to her Marriage Vow. When did scientists ever say that sexual promiscuity optimizes individual or public health?

kluang 07-19-2011 11:47 AM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RNB (Post 1957898)
Just a question, referring to her Marriage Vow. When did scientists ever say that sexual promiscuity optimizes individual or public health?

Hei, she predict the world will end in 2006 so logic don't apply to her

RNB 07-19-2011 12:41 PM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
No, I just want to find out if sexual promiscuity is actually healthy because that doesn't make any sense. Maybe what she means is that having sex is healthy for you, irregardless of whether it is in marriage or not. I know that is true, but I would think that sexual promiscuity brings along other problems with it, both mental and physical, that really aren't beneficial.

ACt 07-19-2011 01:15 PM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
I couldn't be certain on what research as been done, but promiscuity could be seen as advantageous and a detriment depending on what level you decide to take.

I think it is generally accepted that sex itself is healthy. Promotes release of endorphins, hormones and other chemicals that have positive effects all over the body, including neurological and cardiovascular improvements. Promiscuity is a general breeding strategy which would promote the active participant's (usually male) genetic advancement by trying to fertilize as many times as possible (in terms of females, it would be to A) get the best genes/sperm competing and B) spread confusion to fatherhood to try and maintains as much support as they can, thus increasing chances of offspring survival). This would be healthy because you would expect the best fit set of genes to reproduce and survive most, strengthening the population. In terms of STDs, the spread of these, while initially negative impact on health, would eventually lead to those immune or untroubled by them to be the primary breeders, creating a population that was not set back by an STD - more or less, weeding out the unfit. That also would improve the general health of the population.

Of course, that's purely taking reproduction as a given, which it is not in our society. On an individual level, one takes major health risks with promiscuity because we have very low "success" rate with sex (in terms of impregnation) in that while you may be fit, you spend a lot of time "wasting" your reproductive years and experience increased risks of STDs or other diseases, when promiscuous, which then would decrease your reproductive health. In these terms, being celibate or at least monogamous with a partner you know is healthy until you're ready for children is probably more advantageous.

LonelyNinja 07-19-2011 02:09 PM

Re: Republicans - "Freedom of Religion lolwut?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ACt (Post 1957886)
And while we're at it, take out... Rastafarianism...

You monster!

I'm not even surprised by Cain's bullshittery or Bachmann's. In fact, I can't take the Republican party seriously. Woohoo!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.