TexasCHLforum.com

Let me try a different way:
Islam is a minority religion in the United States. How should the non-islamic treat Muslims in the United States? Do you think the Muslims blame the rest of the country when a few punks choose to damage or deface a mosque?
In other countries, such as Indonesia, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates (a US Ally) all have majority Muslim populations with Christian minorities in them. How should they treat non-islamic minorities?
Heck, look at Ethiopia. A country that we've sent massive aid to. It's almost 40% Muslim.

And yea, in every country in the world we can find people treating minorities badly. It sadly seems to be part of human nature. I personally want no part of it.

Look at both sides of the fence. If you don't want to believe that Islam is a peaceful religion then I think you're letting the media do your thinking for you and haven't really looked on your own. You don't have to believe a word of it to read it. Don't take it out of context. And like any religious text, it can be used out of context to support something evil.

What's the end goal here if you think it's impossible to co-exist? A one world religion? Because if we can't co-exist, that's what you're prescribing. A one-world religion sounds like the end of a Good Book that I know about.

Here's what you're looking at.. Relations in Egypt are strained to say the least, here's a pretty good quote that I found:

About a third (35%) of Egyptian Muslims say that all, most or many Muslims in their country are hostile toward Christians, according to a Pew Research Center survey of the world’s Muslims. And, about half (50%) of Egypt’s Muslims say that all, most or many Christians are hostile toward Muslims, the highest share in the 26 countries where the question was asked.

Personally, I thing we can do better than that regardless of our political affiliation, skin color, or religion.

Strat9mm,

I believe that mainstream Islam is peaceful. I believe that the acts of a few shouldn't condemn an entire religion.
I don't believe that just because we're afraid of a few people that it justifies the mistreatment of a majority. I believe that we as a country have done other groups of people wrong historically. I think we've also done wrongs as a Christian religion. These things speak to our imperfections and fallibility and shouldn't condemn us as a people or religion.

Religious wars are an really an oxymoron to me. They exist and have existed historically due to leadership (countries/religions) bending ignorant people to their will through manipulation of words out of context.

Yes, I think the US government is spying on us. I agree with you there. I think the general intent is "for our own good" - but I buy that some might be taking advantage of those programs for domestic reasons.
I don't think it's any different than the implementation of the TSA which costs a fortune and buys us very little protection. Politicians over-react and we're stuck with ineffective programs or programs that erode our civil liberties. Heck, you can't carry a long gun down the street without getting arrested and that right is fairly plainly written. We, as a people, are going to have to decide where the line of safety vs privacy lies... And it's likely going to continue to change over time.

To rail and vilify 1.5 billion people in this world... Yea, I think you're wrong there.

VM, I can never tell if you actually believe what you're writing of if it's just sarcasm... At least it keeps me guessing.

VMI77 wrote: Sp, I take it you'd be OK with living in a majority Muslim country?

With a family, probably not... But it's more of a cultural thing than worrying about violence from members of a main stream religion. Besides, I like dogs and they're a bit of a no-no in that culture.

Religions don't kill people. Stereotyping an entire religion, especially one that has almost 1.5 billion members as "the enemy" as the smacks of bigotry. A religion that speaks toward killing everyone else kinda runs counter to the whole concept of morality, don't you think? I do agree that you can find excepts that call for violence in almost any religious text (including Christian) - but those things need to be taken in an entire context.

There are very violent Muslims out there. There are also violent Christians too.... And violent atheists. I wonder if I could find a violent Buddist?! Don't blame everyone for the actions of a few.

Why bring this up? Because the rant above - I find a lot that I can agree with. But when I start reading about how the Muslim world is out to kill all of us and we need to act fast, you've lost me...

Strat9mm wrote:In case anybody hasn't noticed, the people in Afghanistan, Iraq and the rest of the Muslim world for that matter, have NOT relented of their hatred of the West. They kill and rape us anytime they have a chance, when they're not too busy killing each other in the name of their 'peaceful religion'.

Stratman,
Do you actually know any Muslims? I do. None of them have tried to kill me yet. Please remove the ones that I know from your "rest of the Muslim world" list.

We locked up the Japanese Americans during WWII. All the "Japs" wanted to kill us too, remember? Maybe we should have eradicated those civilians?

And if you want to make a case for a civilized and peaceful religion, make sure you review Christianity in the full historical context.

BTW, I agree with a lot of what you're saying otherwise - but when you indicate that almost 1.5 billion people are all out to kill us, I tend to ignore the rest of the context....

VMI77 wrote: You need to keep up with the news. They're already doing that. It's already been reported that the NSA feeds spy data to the DEA, then the DEA lies about where it came from and either gives it to local police to act on, or acts on it themselves. You're not going to see a documented case. I don't understand why you would believe ANYTHING the government says as many times as they been caught lying....

Actually, I'm aware of what you're referencing. It was reported that the NSA was passing information to the DEA and other governmental agencies for use in prosecution, stipulating that the source of the information could not be referenced.

So you and I heard the same report...

I don't put a lot of faith in our government's ability to tell the whole truth when in comes to surveillance and intelligence. However, I put even LESS trust in media reports as they're usually rife with political agenda.

One thing that you've shown me is that sensational and marginally true media reports spread like wildfire.. I get similar things forwarded to my email inbox by well-meaning friends who don't bother to actually look at the facts and simply forward on the sensationalism and believe it on face value. Many of these reports have very little bearing in truth and I can just see someone sitting back in their armchair as the latest email gets forwarded around the world on face value.

Getting back to the topic - If I saw the NSA text I could agree or disagree with your assessment. What I'm not going to do is help the media continue to spin until I see the factual basis of the report.

BTW, I do believe our government is spying on citizens.. Perhaps "mostly" unintentionally. However, I want a credible and factual report of the US government using unauthorized domestic intelligence in prosecutions before I go on the war path about it. As far as I know, there are no proven cases... Yet... If they exist, they'll show up one day soon.

Show the original document. Is the NSA really calling all American citizens adversaries or are they referring to gathering actionable intelligence from people who are acting against the USA who are referred to as adversaries?

Hint, it'll be in the context of the actual NSA document which seems to be absent for reference. Until then, don't believe the media spin..

To me, it's no different than the TSA or arresting people for carrying long guns publicly in Texas. That is, it's an attempt to determine our willingness to balance our constitutional rights against our government's interest in promoting safety and security.

I have no doubt that giving the government the ability to decrypt all secure communications will result in actionable intelligence. I also believe it's a measure of unreasonable search without cause.

Know what will change it for me? A documented case of the government using secret (unauthorized) intelligence against it's own people in order to prosecute something like tax evasion...