To understand you need to read all the words.

Read all the words. Real spellin words, that mean stuff, right? Like in books? Those strange groups of symbols that represent sounds, that you figure out in yer head to make like its talkin inside yer head?

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

_______________________________________________________________________

"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

To understand you need to read all the words.

And sometimes that is not enough, as you continue to demonstrate.

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

___________________________________________________________________________

Of course you do.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

Since you have a problem deciding which God to pray to your dilemma is obvious. Your contribution to the demise of civil society is just one of the reasons U.S. culture is deteriorating.

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

___________________________________________________________________________

Of course you do.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

Since you have a problem deciding which God to pray to your dilemma is obvious. Your contribution to the demise of civil society is just one of the reasons U.S. culture is deteriorating.

If you don't believe in equal rights, then I find you pathetic. I don't know (or care) what religion you follow, but if you believe that your religion justifies your bigotry, then your religion is pathetic.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

You know me how? Your posts consistently and continually reveal your vile and disgusting bigotry as well as your inbred intolerance.

I'm amazed at the level of hatred you instigate.

I'm disgusted with myself for wishing so much ill will to befall you.

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

___________________________________________________________________________

Of course you do.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

Since you have a problem deciding which God to pray to your dilemma is obvious. Your contribution to the demise of civil society is just one of the reasons U.S. culture is deteriorating.

If you don't believe in equal rights, then I find you pathetic. I don't know (or care) what religion you follow, but if you believe that your religion justifies your bigotry, then your religion is pathetic.

_______________________________________________________________________

As always you misrepresent what I said and stand for.
I believe in equal rights for everyone, not rights for special interest groups, especially those created for sexual perverts forced on people of faith.

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

___________________________________________________________________________

Of course you do.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

Since you have a problem deciding which God to pray to your dilemma is obvious. Your contribution to the demise of civil society is just one of the reasons U.S. culture is deteriorating.

If you don't believe in equal rights, then I find you pathetic. I don't know (or care) what religion you follow, but if you believe that your religion justifies your bigotry, then your religion is pathetic.

_______________________________________________________________________

As always you misrepresent what I said and stand for.
I believe in equal rights for everyone, not rights for special interest groups, especially those created for sexual perverts forced on people of faith.

So you believe in equal rights for everyone, except some people. Got it...

And how exactly are those "sexual perverts" forced on people of faith? How is what they're doing affecting your life? Did they tell you that you couldn't worship whatever God you happen to worship? Did they say that you were not allowed to get married because of your faith?

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

___________________________________________________________________________

Of course you do.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

Since you have a problem deciding which God to pray to your dilemma is obvious. Your contribution to the demise of civil society is just one of the reasons U.S. culture is deteriorating.

If you don't believe in equal rights, then I find you pathetic. I don't know (or care) what religion you follow, but if you believe that your religion justifies your bigotry, then your religion is pathetic.

_______________________________________________________________________

As always you misrepresent what I said and stand for.
I believe in equal rights for everyone, not rights for special interest groups, especially those created for sexual perverts forced on people of faith.

So you believe in equal rights for everyone, except some people. Got it...

And how exactly are those "sexual perverts" forced on people of faith? How is what they're doing affecting your life? Did they tell you that you couldn't worship whatever God you happen to worship? Did they say that you were not allowed to get married because of your faith?

_______________________________________________________________________

If you don't already know the answers to your questions you are obviously ignorant of the issue to which you are posting... again.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

I don't believe any person should be denied the opportunity to run for president of the US based on their religious affiliation. I doubt a person of Muslim faith would have much chance, but they should not be denied the opportunity, as per our constitution.

Mule - you are blinded by both ignorance and vile bigotry.

I find you pathetic.

I'll pray for you.

But... to which God?

___________________________________________________________________________

Of course you do.

As a liberal you lack ethics, faith and morals. You have no problem attacking people of faith while supporting the demand of homosexuals.

Since you have a problem deciding which God to pray to your dilemma is obvious. Your contribution to the demise of civil society is just one of the reasons U.S. culture is deteriorating.

If you don't believe in equal rights, then I find you pathetic. I don't know (or care) what religion you follow, but if you believe that your religion justifies your bigotry, then your religion is pathetic.

_______________________________________________________________________

As always you misrepresent what I said and stand for.
I believe in equal rights for everyone, not rights for special interest groups, especially those created for sexual perverts forced on people of faith.

So you believe in equal rights for everyone, except some people. Got it...

And how exactly are those "sexual perverts" forced on people of faith? How is what they're doing affecting your life? Did they tell you that you couldn't worship whatever God you happen to worship? Did they say that you were not allowed to get married because of your faith?

_______________________________________________________________________

If you don't already know the answers to your questions you are obviously ignorant of the issue to which you are posting... again.

No - You have no answer - per usual.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

He's on the payroll. Agent provocateur.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

_______________________________________________________________________

"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

To understand you need to read all the words.

Nobody is stopping her from exercising her religion ........... I guess you really don't get it.....

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

________________________________________________________________________

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

________________________________________________________________________

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

You mean like how Kim Davis puts her religion before her government duties thus making her ineligible to be county clerk?

Not for nuthin, but for anyone who is truly devout their religion comes before country. However most religions, including Sharia Law and Islam, require that believers respect and obey a country's laws. The US Constitution and Islam are no more compatible or incompatible than the US Constitution and Catholicism, than the US Constitution and Judaism, than the US Constitution and Protestantism, etc.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

________________________________________________________________________

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

You mean like how Kim Davis puts her religion before her government duties thus making her ineligible to be county clerk?

Not for nuthin, but for anyone who is truly devout their religion comes before country. However most religions, including Sharia Law and Islam, require that believers respect and obey a country's laws. The US Constitution and Islam are no more compatible or incompatible than the US Constitution and Catholicism, than the US Constitution and Judaism, than the US Constitution and Protestantism, etc.

___________________________________________________________________

Spoken like a true secular liberal.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

________________________________________________________________________

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

You mean like how Kim Davis puts her religion before her government duties thus making her ineligible to be county clerk?

Not for nuthin, but for anyone who is truly devout their religion comes before country. However most religions, including Sharia Law and Islam, require that believers respect and obey a country's laws. The US Constitution and Islam are no more compatible or incompatible than the US Constitution and Catholicism, than the US Constitution and Judaism, than the US Constitution and Protestantism, etc.

___________________________________________________________________

Spoken like a true secular liberal.

Right. Too bad that label doesn't apply in this case.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

________________________________________________________________________

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

So, you you believe that it's impossible for a Muslim to govern in a manner does not strictly follow Islamic law? We had a presidential candidate who was a Catholic and also Pro-Choice on the abortion issue. We have lots of Christians who are pro-gay marriage and some that are not. Seems to me that you can't make complete broad brush evaluations on somebody based only on their religion.

Tying two current threads together:

The liberals here would have no problem with a Muslim becoming President. Okay.
Muslims are compelled by their religion to kill homosexuals. How do you square that?

Again - I don't care what religion you are as long as you follow the constitution and believe in equal rights for all - and believe in the separation of church and state. If a candidate, regardless of religion can't govern without holding these principles, then I'n not going to vote for them. It's not a matter of what religion they follow - it's a matter of someone forcing their religion on others. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

________________________________________________________________________

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

So, you you believe that it's impossible for a Muslim to govern in a manner does not strictly follow Islamic law? We had a presidential candidate who was a Catholic and also Pro-Choice on the abortion issue. We have lots of Christians who are pro-gay marriage and some that are not. Seems to me that you can't make complete broad brush evaluations on somebody based only on their religion.

_________________________________________________________________________

A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law.
Our Constitution dictates that The Constitution be followed first and always.

A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law.
Our Constitution dictates that The Constitution be followed first and always.

I think you are saying that Christians place the Constitution above their God's laws. So, according to your logic, Kim Davis is in the wrong and should be removed from her job. Seeing as the Supreme Court makes the law of the land and all.

You obviously don’t get it.
A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law and is therefore ineligible to be President.

100% false.

What are you on about? Any citizen of the USA is eligible to be president! Look at Mitt Romney, devout Mormon, got a lot of support, and Mormonism is a conquering type religion too, they have run Utah since day one. Seemed like a fair minded fellow, and did a good job as governor of Massachusetts. Far as I know he didn't put his higher Mormon laws ahead of his public office.

Gus Hall ran for years on the Communist Party ticket, with Angela Davis, a militant communist, as the vice presidential candidate twice! Wolfgang Schrodt, a Nazi, won the primary in 1975 and got 12% of the white vote in the general election! In 2008 John Taylor Bowles (National Socialist Order of America....nazi) ran as "The White People's Candidate". Another freakin Nazi!

Anyone can run, even Frank Zappa. Even you! Muleman for President! It's ok for Nazis to run, so go for it, Fritz!

Qualifications for the Office of President

Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 - ratified February 27, 1951
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

From: http://www.presidentsusa.net/qualifications.html

hegone!

(thx alloak, learned that from you when you said it to me! great saying, hegone! I like it!)

[Edited on 9/23/2015 by BrerRabbit]

Mormons are not obligated to kill the infidels and Communists are not compelled to kill Westerners. The rest on your list are just whack-jobs with no chance of being elected.

The reason an Islamist cannot become President has been already explained.
Next!

A Muslim is obligated to always first follow Allah and Islamic law.
Our Constitution dictates that The Constitution be followed first and always.

I think you are saying that Christians place the Constitution above their God's laws. So, according to your logic, Kim Davis is in the wrong and should be removed from her job. Seeing as the Supreme Court makes the law of the land and all.

Just a correction to this post - The Supreme Court did not make laws, they interpreted the law. Only congress can make laws. Courts interpret laws, and they can call laws unconstitutional if they are in conflict with the constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.

Mormons are not obligated to kill the infidels and Communists are not compelled to kill Westerners. The rest on your list are just whack-jobs with no chance of being elected.

The reason an Islamist cannot become President has been already explained.
Next!

Are Muslims really obligated to kill infidels? I really don't know as that is beyond my expertise, but I do know that the Bible demands that women who are not virgins on their wedding night be stoned to death. The Bible also demands that people be stoned to death for adultery and also for disobeying your parents. However, even though the Bible requires these things of their believers I know no modern day Christians that follow these demands. How many Christians have tattoos of crosses despite the Bible specifically prohibiting tattoos? The point is, just because a holy book requires something, it doesn't mean that all followers of a religion accept a specific teaching.

Mormons are not obligated to kill the infidels and Communists are not compelled to kill Westerners. The rest on your list are just whack-jobs with no chance of being elected.

The reason an Islamist cannot become President has been already explained.
Next!

Are Muslims really obligated to kill infidels? I really don't know as that is beyond my expertise, but I do know that the Bible demands that women who are not virgins on their wedding night be stoned to death. The Bible also demands that people be stoned to death for adultery and also for disobeying your parents. However, even though the Bible requires these things of their believers I know no modern day Christians that follow these demands. How many Christians have tattoos of crosses despite the Bible specifically prohibiting tattoos? The point is, just because a holy book requires something, it doesn't mean that all followers of a religion accept a specific teaching.

_________________________________________________________________________

The Bible is not a handbook for modern Christians and was always intended to evolve.

Christianity has evolved over the centuries and the word “Modern” you wrote explains exactly why.

Islam’s Sharia law has not evolved and demands what modern people would call barbaric practices.

The Bible is not a handbook for modern Christians and was always intended to evolve.

Christianity has evolved over the centuries and the word “Modern” you wrote explains exactly why.

Then how do you justify using the Bible to protest gay marriage? Seems very hypocritical of you. Also, don't you think it is possible that there are Muslims who don't support the uniform implementation of Sharia Law? Turkey is a Muslim country that doesn't have Sharia Law.

The Bible is not a handbook for modern Christians and was always intended to evolve.

Christianity has evolved over the centuries and the word “Modern” you wrote explains exactly why.

Then how do you justify using the Bible to protest gay marriage? Seems very hypocritical of you. Also, don't you think it is possible that there are Muslims who don't support the uniform implementation of Sharia Law? Turkey is a Muslim country that doesn't have Sharia Law.

_______________________________________________________________________

God's Law states that homosexuality is an abomination.

The Bible is not a handbook for modern Christians and was always intended to evolve.

Christianity has evolved over the centuries and the word “Modern” you wrote explains exactly why.

Then how do you justify using the Bible to protest gay marriage? Seems very hypocritical of you. Also, don't you think it is possible that there are Muslims who don't support the uniform implementation of Sharia Law? Turkey is a Muslim country that doesn't have Sharia Law.

_______________________________________________________________________

God's Law states that homosexuality is an abomination.

The Bible (God's Law) says that eating pork and shellfish are an abomination. Should eating pork be against the law too?

God's Law should be followed by all believers of a religion, but people of other religions should not be obligated to follow some other religions beliefs. Seems like conservatives want government out of their lives, except when it comes to religious beliefs. Then they want the government to force everybody to follow their beliefs. Sorry, but that is why our founding fathers prohibited the government from favoring one religion over another.