It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tennessee bill makes practicing islam pretty much illegal

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by TonyBravada
"the encouragement of any person to support the abrogation, destruction, or violation of the United States or Tennessee Constitutions, or the destruction of the national existence of the United States or the sovereignty of this state, and which includes among other methods to achieve these ends, the likely use of imminent violence."
You accused others of doing a selective reading of the law, but it seems you are doing it as well.

The statement preceding your citation says “‘Sharia’ means the set of rules, precepts, instructions, or edicts which are said to emanate directly or indirectly from the god of Allah or the prophet Mohammed and which include directly or indirectly the encouragement ...”

They are not defining Sharia only as the acts that “directly or indirectly [encourage] any person to support the abrogation, destruction, or violation of the United States or Tennessee Constitutions,” but as a subset of a “set of rules, precepts, instructions, or edicts which are said to emanate directly or indirectly from the god of Allah or the prophet Mohammed.”

If the purpose of the Tennessee lawmakers is to protect against terrorist activity, why even mention Sharia? Other religious groups or persons can engage in acts of terrorism. Atheists can engage in acts of terrorism.

What does ‘encouragement’ even mean? It’s not defined in the bill. If, for example, people protest against the Federal Reserve, could that be considered “encouragement to support the abrogation ... of the United States”? Maybe it would, if they were of Islamic faith, apparently. And that’s ultimately the problem with the bill.

As much as you can try and parse the language of this bill, it’s clearly specifically targeted at people of a particular religion.



Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
Well the Constitution limits what Congress can do in this case. And also in this case, this is Tennessee so they are bound by their state constitution. Regardless of whether or not I agree with this, this is the business of TN and her residents.
You know the First Amendment applies to state governments as well, right?




edit on 11-5-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
When are people going to realize the hard reality that many southern, particularly Republicans, are inclined to ethnocentric fascism, and still fighting the civil war.

They are glad to make illegal this foreign religion, where usually dark people practice.
Of course particularly with the like minded nutty fascist amongst the Salafi lunatics of bin Laden.

These two groups deserve each other.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by CitizenNum287119327
But there is no problem with having
Jewish Law in America!


Beth Din of America


Beth Din of America is a rabbinical court serving affiliated and unaffiliated Jews, including the entire spectrum of the Orthodox Jewish community.




You cant ban sharia law or any sharia law. Its like saying you cant have new years propositions. Adeherece to the rulings of a sharia court or orthodox court is voluntary.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


i condemn any state sanctioned
murder

but us laws
are us laws



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


Two things: First, I quote the full section in my response above that one and was restating that part. And B, there's a key word (key words) in there... "and" or "and which." So I not only provided that whole section of the law, but linked to the entire proposed law as well. In any case, legal terminology is very clear in the difference between an "and" and an "or" in a law; and means both, not either.
So if your point is that it targets Islam then why even argue the point by quoting me? It targets specific part of the Muslim faith, and I agreed above that it is based in bigotry...
edit on 11-5-2011 by TonyBravada because: clarity



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Don't they have the highest rate of poverty in this country? I remember reading that TN was on a list of such things.

Constructing houses of worship CREATES JOBS and yet, TN residents don't want that?

Our founding fathers would be rolling in their graves.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
flame me if you must

but if your religion condones:

stoning people
beheading people
strapping a bomb onto yourself
consider women as your property
and rape them because they think they own them.
and killing your own children because they date non muslims.

well it should be illegal and sharia pretty much covers that.

thats not racism nor is it xenophobia as alot of people cry foul its just plain comom sense.

i think i am going to convert to islam so the liberals will defend me and i can do whatever i wish.
edit on 11-5-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


You are aware that EXTREMISTS practice this crap?

Get your head out of the sand for once.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


you are aware that even moderates support that?

yeah get your head out of the sand,



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


WHAT moderates?

I swear, this site hits a new LOW every single day with people spouting ignorance as if it were about to go out of style.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   
1st Amendment Of The Constitution says different so this new law will die a horrid death!



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
flame me if you must

but if your religion condones:

stoning people
beheading people
strapping a bomb onto yourself
consider women as your property
and rape them because they think they own them.
and killing your own children because they date non muslims.

well it should be illegal and sharia pretty much covers that.

thats not racism nor is it xenophobia as alot of people cry foul its just plain comom sense.

i think i am going to convert to islam so the liberals will defend me and i can do whatever i wish.
edit on 11-5-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


Cite the passages and entries into the Qua'Ran that actually says this? Since you can't and won't makes what you say about this nullified!



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ReVoLuTiOn76
Yeah that is crap. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. I think this prohibits people from practicaly, practicing Islam.

Oh, and btw, I am a christian, so not all christians are religious nuts, or intolerant of anyone elses religion.


You issued doublespeak. This protects every person of every faith regardless of denomination in the practice of their faith. Do not use this to twist the Constitution to suit some sort of Pseudo Christian Rhetoric.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." There is a good case to be made that the textual context of this particular passage is defensive war, even if the historical context was not. However, there are also two worrisome pieces to this verse. The first is that the killing of others is authorized in the event of "persecution" (a qualification that is ambiguous at best). The second is that fighting may persist until "religion is for Allah." The example set by Muhammad is not reassuring.



Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding caravans with this verse.



Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."



Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').



Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.



Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"



Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."



And im only posting a small amount...



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Being from London I have a broader knowledge of the problems that Islamic Sharia law poses.

We have over 6 million of them already in a population of 70 million.

Everyone (White British) is leaving this sinking ship for either Spain, America, or Australia.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by LondonerBLV
The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." There is a good case to be made that the textual context of this particular passage is defensive war, even if the historical context was not. However, there are also two worrisome pieces to this verse. The first is that the killing of others is authorized in the event of "persecution" (a qualification that is ambiguous at best). The second is that fighting may persist until "religion is for Allah." The example set by Muhammad is not reassuring.
--This describes protecting your community.

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."
--This can and does apply to every faith universally as every follower of every faith is some type of soldier of God.

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding caravans with this verse.
--Violence is acceptable when your community and centuries of tradition is threatened and does apply to other faiths as well.

Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."
--All this does is mandate religious service for all. Makes it law to attend faith services.

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority".
This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').
--No it does not and yet another that can apply to all other faiths.

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."
The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.
--It is not, it is the promise of 72 Virgins which is absolute hogwash.

Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"
--That same thinking could and does apply to other faiths as well/

Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
--This allows other faiths to support and endorse this. Yet again, this applies to other faiths as well.

And im only posting a small amount...


Answered in quote!



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


This, coming from the guy who name drops the constitution every chance he gets?

Way to be a Cafeteria Conservative, picking and choosing what you want to hear from it. What happens to limited government that didn't step into people's lives?



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Someone336
reply to post by neo96
 


This, coming from the guy who name drops the constitution every chance he gets?

Way to be a Cafeteria Conservative, picking and choosing what you want to hear from it. What happens to limited government that didn't step into people's lives?


To add upon what you are saying Some and that is that anyone can cite whatever part of this doc they want but when you "Cut & Run" and make the Constitution itself only apply to Christians only makes your case baseless and sinkable out of the gate and furthermore reiterates and proves that the person is Anti American and Anti Constitution. Remember the last time a bunch of people were told their way of worship was illegal? We got The Holocaust which cost north of 25 Million!

IT EITHER APPLIES TO EVERYONE OF ALL FAITHS UNIVERSALLY OR DOES NOT APPLY TO ANYONE OF ANY FAITH PERIOD! Nothing else matters but this!
edit on 12-5-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I would rather they pass a bill which makes practicing stupidity illegal.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


yeah the constitution is a protection from government and religion.


guess you never heard of the american who killed his daughter because she dated outside of her religion

guess you never heard about the american who raped and beat his wife because she was his property.

and that case the judged ruled in the husbands favor.

muslim americans who practiced sharia and shaira superceeds american law,


yeah i am for the constitution but where were the constitutional rights for those victims and the many others


cafeteria conservative give me a break.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join