reply to post by insideNSA
uhhh that wasn't the point. the point was that these girls where persecuted because they were Christian, nothing else.
Actually had you read the FIVE YEAR OLD ARTICLE that you posted as a thread, you would know that NO the article clearly states it is SUSPECTED that
they might have been killed because they were Christian.
So once again, in that rush to draw a conclusion, that conclusion that might serve the purpose of formenting anger and fear and being provocative you
neglected to actually get the facts.
Futher, once again you are basically wishing for Americans to do the same thing, persecute another religion, everyone in that religion.
So besides illustrating how far too many ATS members have something frightening in common with religious zealots of all stripes, and that some members
can't even understand what they are conveying in their own posts, you have failed to draw a direct factual reason through such examples as to why the
1st Amendment of the Constitution is something you are advocating abandoning.
Even though I don't agree with your views, if your views pertained to a religion, and that religion wanted to build a facility on private property
zoned for such a building, you have that constitutional right.
I have the right to not be a member of that religion.
I have the right to not like that religion.
I don't have the right to alter the Constitution simply because of that.
While many display they don't understand their own arguments, often because they are arguments they have picked up from others, other instigators,
other websites, other editiorials, that simply represent their own mood, what you don't understand is when you strike down an American's fundamental
rights through the constitution, it opens a Pandora's Box that eventually will have a detrimental effect to the things you rely on being protected by
I get that many people are angry, but the words angry and smart have two different meanings and definitions.
The words angry and right have two different definitions.
The closest word I can think of to angry is stupid.
All I am hearing is a lot of blanket unrelated stupid arguments as to why people should be angry and abandon the constitution for the sake of a bunch
of angry people.
Who at best can defend this stupidity by citing examples in third world nations that do not have our constitution, and equality and protection of
So maybe if you lived in Indonesia you would have something to worry about.
Turning this nation into a political system similiar to Indonesia's a State Run Theocracy and Dictatorship because people are angry and scared, after
inciting those fears and that anger themselves, really is stupid.
Some might not be big enough to admit it or accept it because they are so agenda driven.
But it is stupid nonetheless.
Uphold the Constitution and the very thing you are worried about, which is the very thing you want to do to another religion, can in fact never happen
Don't uphold the Constitution, deny people religious freedom and rest assured it will eventually come back to haunt everyone and not just Muslims.
[edit on 23/8/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]