Marco Rubio Slams Obama's Speech On Fighting Islamophobia

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: enlightenedservant

No one said that, obviously. Yes Islamic terrorism is a real thing.

Murder is real thing. It doesn't matter why someone is murdered because it's equally wrong either way. And apparently unlike you, I view all lif as precious, not just the lives of the people I accept.

Tell that to BLM, they only seem to care if it's a black life at the hands of a white person.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Figures.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408

I got that you are desperately trying to smear this mosque with no credible evidence. There's that.

PS: Countering thinkprogress with Fox News. Lol.

TP was spewing their normal garbage lies about Fox, all I did was prove them wrong. Fox was the one being smeared, should I have used a different source that wasn't mentioned?

*Lefty Logic*

All you proved is that Fox News is willing to make flimsy connections to "prove" their mistrust of anything Muslim, but I already knew that.

Just that mosque in Baltimore. Did you already know that too?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation respecting an establishment of religion. The second half of the Establishment Clause inherently prohibits the government from preferring any one religion over another. While the Establishment Clause does prohibit Congress from preferring or elevating one religion over another, still it does not prohibit the government's entry into the religious domain to make accommodations for religious observances and practices in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause.

These "anti sharia laws" are aimed at blocking the government from making such accommodations for practices like local Sharia law tribunals, which right now is a somewhat gray area based on the Free Exercise Clause.

There is nothing in the First Amendement that prohibits stuff like this,

An Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law in Texas has been confirmed by Breitbart Texas. The tribunal is operating as a non-profit organization in Dallas. One of the attorneys for the tribunal said participation and acceptance of the tribunal’s decisions are “voluntary.”

Breitbart Texas spoke with one of the “judges,” Dr. Taher El-badawi. He said the tribunal operates under Sharia law as a form of “non-binding dispute resolution.” El-badawi said their organization is “a tribunal, not arbitration.” A tribunal is defined by Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “a court or forum of justice.” The four Islamic attorneys call themselves “judges” not “arbitrators.”

Breitbart Texas asked what happens when there is a conflict between Sharia law and Texas law. El-badawi said most of the time, the laws are in agreement. When pushed further he admitted that, “we follow Sharia law.” However, he explained, “If the parties are not satisfied with the tribunal’s decision, they do not have to accept it and they can take the matter to Texas civil courts.” He did not say what the social ramifications of rejecting the “judge’s” decision would be.

www.donotlink.com...

You really think it is a good idea to have a group of people adopting their own set of laws in your country.

Clearly the First Amendement does not prohibit this and that's why they want these anti Sharia laws.

He also said there is a difference between how a man and a woman can request a divorce under their system. “The husband can request the divorce directly from the tribunal,” El-badawi stated. “The wife must go to an Imam who will request the divorce for her.” He called it “two paths to the same result.”

If your First Amendement already has this covered like you claim, then why have 7 states adopted such legislation?

A ban on sharia law is legislation that would ban the application or implementation of Islamic law (sharia) in courts in any jurisdiction. In the United States, as of 2014 seven states have "banned Sharia law", or passed some kind of ballot measure that "prohibits the states courts from considering foreign, international or religious law."[1]

en.wikipedia.org...


You thought it was funny, I think it is hilarious.


Don't mistake my confidence for arrogance.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t

White or black, they are felons, as in convicted of crimes in courts of law.

Ok. So what are you trying to say with your little factoid then?

Exactly what I said.

a reply to: DutchMasterChief

So what? The Jewish community, the Amish community, and other deeply religious communities already all do these things. Hey guess what? None of their local courts supersede the US judicial process. They are still ALL accountable to US laws before any of their religious ones.

a reply to: ketsuko

Why would it take this for Obama to want to make speeches about it?

Are you then saying the POTUS only cares if he can score political points?

Why should he champion a non issue. Your righteous indignation is baseless.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So what?

You responded to me making the claim that your First Amendement already prohibits Sharia law. It doesn't, like I just showed you.

Any feedback on that?

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

He is acting like there is an overall anti islam sentiment across America affecting American muslims when this really is not the case at all.

If you don't think anti-Muslim sentiment across America is affecting American Muslims, I don't know where you've been.

originally posted by: ketsuko
The problem is when Muslims demand their own parallel court system to operate exclusively by Shariah.

Who's demanding a "parallel court system"? In which rag did you read that phrase? Shariah is not "parallel" to US law, and Muslims are not demanding that. That's just fear-mongering.

We cannot have two legal systems, not and have everyone equal under the law.

True. But willing participation in Shariah does not create another legal system. I'm not sure you understand what Shariah actually is... as practiced in addition to and in accordance with US law, just as several other religious legal constructs are in this country... and about which no one EVER complains or fear-mongers.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ketsuko

Why would it take this for Obama to want to make speeches about it?

Are you then saying the POTUS only cares if he can score political points?

Why should he champion a non issue. Your righteous indignation is baseless.

OK, if anti-Semitism and Jewish hate crimes are non-issues, then so are anti-Islamic ones. There are MORE anti-Semitic and Jewish hate crimes than there are anti-Islamic ones in this country.

So he shouldn't be making this speech, either.

a reply to: ketsuko

Like I said, when one or all of the Republican presidential candidates begin using antisemitism to gain favor and votes, then, and only then, will your complaint have any substance.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

If you don't think anti-Muslim sentiment across America is affecting American Muslims, I don't know where you've been.

Any more than is the case with Mexicans, Jews or African Americans to name a few groups?

Obama talking about Islamophobia. Whenever you see the word you see the victimisation and shifting of blame.

It should be noted that hate crimes of any type is appalling. The rise in anti-muslim hate is frightening and could get out of hand. But the anti-muslim hate and rhetoric, no matter how stupid and unwarranted, is the direct result of Islamic terrorism. Anti-Muslim sentiment rises and falls with Islamic terrorism.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ketsuko

Like I said, when one or all of the Republican presidential candidates begin using antisemitism to gain favor and votes, then, and only then, will your complaint have any substance.

Either it's an issue or it's not and we should stop it or not. And if it's an issue, then we should worry about hate crimes against all religious affiliations, not just Muslims. Currently, the Jews are still the most hated, so he should be worried about reducing hate crimes against them if he's worried about the hate crimes against Muslims.

And if the only reason Obama cares is because he can score political points, then it isn't about Islamophobia that he's worried. He's playing politics. He doesn't actually care at all. He just hated Republicans which is in fact a legitimate reason for Rubio to be angry at him. He isn't trying to reduce hate crimes against Muslims at all. He's trying to score points.

Either way, you counter arguments don't work.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Anti-Muslim sentiment rises and falls with Islamic terrorism.

Gee.......If only there was anything we could correlate Islamic Terrorism to.............

a reply to: windword

Gee.......If only there was anything we correlate Islamic Terrorism to.............

Islam

Most people don't want Rubio because he is a first term senator like Obama was. I don't like Rubio because he sucks. Rubio hates my medicine and hates my gay friends. So Rubio and his Cuban high heels can samba the hell away from me.