Don't burn the Quran, but beheadings are OK...

[joeydb]

Anybody else see a problem with this?

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2010/09/i...ng-politician/

No. That guys hair is ridiculous. He looks like the lead singer of A Flock of Seagulls.

[dellinger63]

the same sensitivity and consideration expected in NYC, from the muslims wanting a mosque at ground zero, should be displayed by these yahoos wanting to burn Korans. Both groups have more in common than they will ever realize.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

the same sensitivity and consideration expected in NYC, from the muslims wanting a mosque at ground zero, should be displayed by these yahoos wanting to burn Korans. Both groups have more in common than they will ever realize.

exactly. consistency is nice

White House is completely inconsistent.

Mosque is fine, but Quran burning is condemned (per SOS Clinton).

At least GBBob and Mira display consistency.

I happen to think both are terrible idea's and should not be happening!

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

exactly. consistency is nice

White House is completely inconsistent.

Mosque is fine, but Quran burning is condemned (per SOS Clinton).

At least GBBob and Mira display consistency.

I happen to think both are terrible idea's and should not be happening!

Of course they both have the right to do it, but it's foolish to try to place one group trying to freely practice their religion at some moral equivalence as a group actively doing nothing but causing a scene by trashing another religion and burning their holy book, whether they agree with it or not.

If Muslims wanted to open an anti-Christian center two blocks from Ground Zero and have piss on the Bible parties, or a center that celebrated the perpetrators of 9/11 as glorious examples of what Muslims are all about, then maybe you'd have a point, but as far as I can tell, they don't, so in turn, you don't.

They can all do whatever they want, because it's their right, but that's just ridiculous to pretend these two are the exact same thing. The only things they really have in common are 1.) They both have the right to do it 2.) Some people oppose each of them.

No more than that, because they're worlds apart, and it's not a matter of "inconsistency" to point that out.

[clyde]

Shoot all people in the steeple who have agendas and false erogenous zones.



ALL of them.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Of course they both have the right to do it, but it's foolish to try to place one group trying to freely practice their religion at some moral equivalence as a group actively doing nothing but causing a scene by trashing another religion and burning their holy book, whether they agree with it or not.

If Muslims wanted to open an anti-Christian center two blocks from Ground Zero and have piss on the Bible parties, or a center that celebrated the perpetrators of 9/11 as glorious examples of what Muslims are all about, then maybe you'd have a point, but as far as I can tell, they don't, so in turn, you don't.

They can all do whatever they want, because it's their right, but that's just ridiculous to pretend these two are the exact same thing. The only things they really have in common are 1.) They both have the right to do it 2.) Some people oppose each of them.

No more than that, because they're worlds apart, and it's not a matter of "inconsistency" to point that out.

stop being inconsistent. Both actions are covered under that precious 1st amendment. They are the same thing when you look at it through the eyes of the Constitution.

Both actions are insensitive. Muslim terrorists killed 3k at ground zero and now there will be a muslim mosque right there. Insensitive to a lot of New Yorkers. If the Iman cared, or had any class, he'd understand that.

The Koran burning party is insensitive to a religion. Also happens to be a relgion that the radicals get riled up to kill others when they see Korans burning on tv. If the pastor had any brains, or class, he'd understand that.

The Koran burning party also happens to be idiotic and useless. The Muslim mosque can move down the street and nobody would have a problem.

They are both insensitive to different groups of people.

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Of course they both have the right to do it, but it's foolish to try to place one group trying to freely practice their religion at some moral equivalence as a group actively doing nothing but causing a scene by trashing another religion and burning their holy book, whether they agree with it or not.

One is irrational, impulsive, and trashy and the other is rational, calculated and "classy"

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

If Muslims wanted to open an anti-Christian center two blocks from Ground Zero and have piss on the Bible parties, or a center that celebrated the perpetrators of 9/11 as glorious examples of what Muslims are all about, then maybe you'd have a point, but as far as I can tell, they don't, so in turn, you don't.

They don't because their mere presence is a much better FU. It's quite brilliant.

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

They can all do whatever they want, because it's their right, but that's just ridiculous to pretend these two are the exact same thing. The only things they really have in common are 1.) They both have the right to do it 2.) Some people oppose each of them.

No more than that, because they're worlds apart, and it's not a matter of "inconsistency" to point that out.

They both believe in fairy tales.

[dagolfer33]

Scuds prolly got a plane ticket to Gainesville.