#MissingThePoint Good meme bro; The problem is a hateful religion, not guns. If muslims want to be known as a peaceful religion, they need to seperate themselves from the doctrine of "kill the infidels". They should form a new denomination or something like that to show us who we can actually trust.
1) Kind of find it funny how hating gays is suddenly unique to only Muslims.
2) You are absolutely right. Disassociation is the best way to go. It had worked well in the past, so there is no reason it shouldn't work now.
It's a major world-wide religion that commands it's followers to kill the gays. However, they could solve all their problems if they just removed themselves from that part of their religion. Then nobody could claim they hate gays, and everyone would feel more comfortable about the whole situation- The same way other religions have disassociated themselves from parts that were out dated or wrong.
The only difference that Islam and Christianity have in there "damn the gays to hell" department is that Radical Muslims practice it on larger groups of people, while Radical Christians have isolated outbursts.
But I still agree, disassociation is best for them at this point.
8 ups, 5y,
Saw on one of the news channels that some Muslim religious leaders are going to have a March down in Florida. This is supposed to show support for the families of the people who got killed in the shooting and help show that Islam is a caring and peaceful religion.
I really think they need a separate part to distinguish themselves from the past doctrine that includes hate and malice. Sort of like how Christians are not Jews because we have some differences from the Jews, although it is the religion from which ours was born.
Right, this time they have spoken out at least here. Worldwide as well as here (with a few exceptions) they have been very quiet, whether because they secretly support the terrorists or are in fear of them. As I said though, I was glad to hear a unified condemnation this time from CAIR, but they have been known to fund some of the worst and refused to condemn in the past, or condemn while placing the blame on the US, which is why many of us who have watched this remain skeptical when it comes to CAIR.
I've heard him use the word "radical" before, but never put "Islam" and "terrorism" in the same sentence, let alone the same conversation. I don't think Obama connects the two, or more likely, is afraid of the repercussions of speaking such. If Hillary gets elected, this weak-kneed policy could become known as Obama Part II.
militarily speaking an attack on radicals WOULD be an attack on all since they are cowards and hide among women and children so in the event of military action they can parade their "Collateral damage" and say "look how evil the West is."
Would more gun control be a bad thing? That asshole was probed by the FBI as a terror suspect but still legally bought an assault rifle (and there was even a bill proposed that would have prevented terror suspects from getting legal guns but it was shot down in the Senate, no pun intended). Obama simply saying Islamic Terrorism isn't going to fix any problems.
I think that it would be common sense to withhold issuing permits to anyone on the no fly list or under investigation. Unfortunately, murderous criminals don't respect the law, so I'm not sure that would have prevented this tragedy. The intent of the meme is to call Obama out on his refusal to dare speak of Islamic Terrorism while he defaults to his fetal position and cries for gun control.
That wasn't quite what I was saying. The moderate Liberal perspective (so not the one Clinton or Obama follow, I guess) says that the best way to stop criminals with guns is to stop them from getting guns in the first place through better background checks and bans on certain groups. There is no law for a criminal to fail to follow, it's not like people actually want to just put up a sign that says NO GUNS (like Obama).
4 ups, 5y
Except ... they will put almost everyone on the list (remember Filegate & the IRS scandal). Had they refused to sell him a gun, he'd have sued saying "They refused to sell me a gun because I'm Muslim."
No criminal will obey that law and since gun ownership is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, it doesn't fall under the "privilege" definition most lefties bring up. The fact is, "how you think" isn't a valid reason to deny anyone one of their Constitutional rights.
Besides, do you think the only reason he carried this out was access to guns? That's where the libs just don't get it. He would've created a pipe bomb, a propane bomb, or some other way that could've killed many, many more.
Let me set it all straight! You don't need a gun to kill a person... Does everybody agree that you can kill a man with a broom? Why don't we have broom control as well, ha? Guns are just the most usual weapon which means that if you take them away people will move on to the next thing... (reply the names of the objects that can kill a person if bored and I know you are)
Your forget that the event is still under investigation, quit been political sheep. We already know the American people can see a shooting squad execute a Republican hate group and still refuse gun control.