Obama: U.S. "Not A Christian Nation...

[Psi Wavefunction]

*nonsense*

Evidence please.

WW1 & 2 were not big enough.

Im saying if one side completely eradicated the other in a massive conflict then that problem would be solved

In some ways, yeah. But then new conflicts would arise. Humanity cannot become homogenous enough...

And then there's the issue of "Not us! Please not us! Resolve your conflicts AFTER our generation, and our kids' generation, etc"

[AshtonBlack]

Why not go the whole nine yards and suggest a 90% de-population? That'd sort all the problems. 600million. That's a nice number.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

*nonsense*

Evidence please.

WW1 & 2 were not big enough.

Im saying if one side completely eradicated the other in a massive conflict then that problem would be solved

Nonsense. There would still be humans left. The survivors would start fighting sooner or later. Probably about who started the war.

[AshtonBlack]

*nonsense*

Evidence please.

WW1 & 2 were not big enough.

Im saying if one side completely eradicated the other in a massive conflict then that problem would be solved

Nonsense. There would still be humans left. The survivors would start fighting sooner or later. Probably about who started the war.

Then they'd be a fight about who's going to pay to bill.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Then they'd be a fight about who's going to pay to bill.

Nah, just leave the bill for the (remaining) future generation.

[AshtonBlack]

Then they'd be a fight about who's going to pay to bill.

Nah, just leave the bill for the (remaining) future generation.

That sounds familiar!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Then they'd be a fight about who's going to pay to bill.

Nah, just leave the bill for the (remaining) future generation.

That sounds familiar!

SSDD.

[Ian]

Nice to see Gingrich is in a snit about the new administration not being very church-friendly.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... rich-says/
(CNN) — Newt Gingrich said Tuesday the Obama administration is "intensely secular" and "anti-religious," the former House Speaker's second hard-hitting criticism of the new administration this week.

In an interview with FOX News, Gingrich said he strongly disagreed with Obama's choice of Harry Knox — an outspoken activist for gay rights — to the White House advisory council on faith-based initiatives.

"I think their goal is to have a very secular America in which government dominates everything," he said. "Why wouldn't you put an anti-religious, left-wing zealot on a faith-based group? It's a perfect pattern for this administration."

Since 2005, Knox has served as the director of the Human Rights Campaign, a national organization that advocates on behalf of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. He is also a former Methodist pastor.

Obama formally named Knox to the 25-member advisory council on Monday, a move that has not sat well with some Christian conservatives. The conservative Catholic League called him "unfit to serve," especially taking issue with Knox's recent comment characterizing Pope Benedict XVI as a "discredited leader" because of his opposition to gay marriage.

In a statement released earlier this week, Knox said, "The lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community is eager to help the administration achieve its goals around economic recovery and fighting poverty; fatherhood and healthy families; inter-religious dialogue; care for the environment; and global poverty, health and development."

But Gingrich said the Knox appointment, along with some other moves, proves the administration is trying to "go down in history as a consistently anti-religious, secular group of people who are consciously trying to drive things out."

Two days ago, Gingrich told Politico former Vice President Dick Cheney was "clearly right" when he asserted the Obama administration's national security policies have left the country more vulnerable to a terrorist attack.

[Chinaski]

My respect for Obama grows every day. I hope I will soon be proud to call myself an American again.

[Trolldor]

*nonsense*

Evidence please.

WW1 & 2 were not big enough.

Im saying if one side completely eradicated the other in a massive conflict then that problem would be solved

No, it wouldn't. It would merely give birth to another one.
Peaceful eradication breaks, violence merely creates ashes from which it is reborn.

[al-rawandi]

Of course.

Respect of Freedom Of Religion is a Christian value

No but it is a trait found in Christian countries, presently. There is no doubt that Christian culture succeeded in producing enlightenment in a way that Islam hasn't, can't and won't. Also Jesus was, for all intents and purposes, a pacifist, which is significantly different from Muhammad.

[al-rawandi]

You don't think he might possibly be promoting tolerance towards the large number of Muslims who are as normal as the rest of the vaguely religious Xtians?

You are way off. The vaguely Christian folks denounce Christian groups that perpetrate terror and other wrongs. There are next to NO Muslims presently decrying and eschewing violence perpetrated by Muslims, in the name of Islam, citing the canonical texts of Islam. In fact the largest Muslim body in America (Council on American Islamic Relations... CAIR) refuses to condemn Hamas and is an un-indicted co-conspirator in a terror funding conviction against the Holy Land Foundation.

Routinely it is found that so-called "pro-peace" Imams sing a rather different tune when the public isn't watching... Ijaz Mian for example, among any number of others I can think of. In fact there was one Imam who was Mr. Peace (in Orange County) until the FBI recorded him secretly praising jihad and demanding the murder of Jews and what not. What was the reaction of Muslims???? Denounce his comment? NO! They gathered together to complain that the FBI didn't trust them. It is almost beyond belief.

The problem is that institutionalized deceit and deceptive dissimulation permeate Islam and the Muslim community. But it is good to know that you so blindly trust them.

[al-rawandi]

You don't think he might possibly be promoting tolerance towards the large number of Muslims who are as normal as the rest of the vaguely religious Xtians?

Nope

I'm with you, Lionheart! The US should continue to piss off everybody it can. Only by perpetual war can we achieve perpetual peace!

You as if it is the US that unilaterally declares war on peaceful people for no reason whatsoever. Yeah the US pissed off the Muslims huh? I guess that explains the 11 centuries of jihad violence that predates the existence of the United States... That post was absolute shit, it denotes a total lack of understanding of the issues at hand.

Islam declares war on the unbeliever, the Jew, the Christian, and even the not quite Muslim enough in the Qur'an, it reaffirms this in the Hadith of Muhammad and the Sira of his life, it is reiterated by the classical Muslim jurists, it is restated by the present day Muslim jurist and is the sine qua non of every bit of the bloody 1400 year history of Islam. You blaming the US for this is about like blaming Madonna for the fall of Rome.

You can certainly do better.

[al-rawandi]

You don't think he might possibly be promoting tolerance towards the large number of Muslims who are as normal as the rest of the vaguely religious Xtians?

Nope

I'm with you, Lionheart! The US should continue to piss off everybody it can. Only by perpetual war can we achieve perpetual peace!

The odd thing is a massive world war where all conflicts were settled would be a much faster way of bringing about world peace than all this multiculturalism and what not.

What makes the grass grow?

Yep, that worked very well in WWII. And WWI. And . . .

So what exactly is your suggestion? Role over and pretend Islam doesn't exist? Pretend that there aren't fundamental differences in how we would like our respective societies run? This would work from our perspective... who gives a shit if the Iranian want Shariah, right? Now the issue is that they don't share our indifference, they wish to subjugate the Kuffar, there is no peace there is no truce, there is Islam and there is war.

And yes wwII destroyed Euro-fascism, it ended the 3rd Reich, it ended the Holocaust, it destroyed the genocidal emperor worshiping death cult in Japan. So yes it was a costly success. Pacifists have the good fortune to live in countries with well armed armies.

[al-rawandi]

*nonsense*

Evidence please.

WW1 & 2 were not big enough.

Im saying if one side completely eradicated the other in a massive conflict then that problem would be solved

Lionheart,

Unfortunately you are right. It would end that conflict. It is surprising that no one wants to admit this. The sad state of atheists is they think that there is some predetermined outcome, where if we are just really nice and don't make anyone mad, everyone will become a secularist and create states based on a uniform interpretation of human rights and dignity. This is false, there is no guarantee, there is no mandate from evolution (natural selection) for democratic societies to succeed and flourish. In fact there seems to be a strong selection bias for those societies most fanatically loyal and motivated.

It is shaping up to be a situation where we can continue to put up with the current state of terror attacks until a Muslim state or group gets an apocalyptic weapon and uses it, at which point all the jackasses with "coexist" bumper stickers can shut the fuck up, or we can begin to deal with the problem now using military superiority, which we still posses in abundance. It is only a matter of time before a group like al-Qaeda gets a nuclear or biological weapon... and then there will be nothing to stop them from using it. Already Hezbollah has adopted a flag with a mushroom cloud emblazoned upon it, what more do we need to get the hint that coexistence isn't really in their dictionary.