Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You pick the Queen of Jordan and post it over and over again. LOL. She is certainly stunning! Show me where this is the norm in the majority of Muslim countries because it's not. You know it and I know it. I am hardly a pig. I am a woman with a little girl who wants her rights as a woman to expand. I am a woman with many gay friends and family who wants them to be included and feel secure in society. Islam is not compatible with those wishes for the people I love. I am also offended by hard core Christians. People should be free to live the lives they chose. Islam does not believe this and I have a problem with that. That hardly makes me a pig.

Amen!!! and the fact that you PP, called her a pig illustrates exactly why we should NEVER have a Muslim president in the USA-we would like to live our lives with freedom and in peace and security! Thank you very much! I may just have to vote for Ben-he does have an exceptional understanding of the human brain-maybe that is a good thing as we are surrounded by morons who do not use theirs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

Oh really? Yes they are required to cover head to toe and that's just the beginning. Show me one picture of a Muslim first lady whose hair is not covered and who is showing her legs. Just one. Please! Let's talk about honor killings, arranged marriages, women not being allowed to divorce abusive husbands. Pre-marital sex is considered a CRIME against Islam. I wouldn't want a sitting President in office who might be quietly sympathetic to any of these customs. And the liberal left is so up in arms over women's rights as far as abortion when it comes to Christianity. Notice you didn't mention Islam's stance on gays. Hypocrits. I agree with Ben Carson, I don't want a Muslim in office anymore than I would want a Religious zealot like Huckabee in the Presidency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam

Women aren't required to dress all in black or cover their faces. This is what you said originally.

Arranged marriages are arranged for men and women. Men don't like them any more than women do.

Premarital sex is a crime in Islam for both men and women.

Plus, you're kind of an idiot for challenging us to show an uncovered Muslim first lady, when there are so many examples of them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/05/28/in-pakistan-honor-killings-claim-1000-womens-lives-annually-why-is-this-still-happening/
In Pakistan, 1,000 women die in ‘honor killings’ annually. Why is this happening?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling_2.html
Thousands of Women Killed for Family "Honor"

one country, one example
still enough to make me sick, as it's tolerated by the goverrnment

What are the stats on men?

Anonymous wrote:That is because it is the only religion that has demonstrated that they will hurt you if you do not adhere to their way of life-they want to impose their way of life and their ultimate goal is to reign over the entire world. Why the hell do they want Sharia laws in Texas-assimilate or leave-if we pulled that stuff in their countries, they would kill us! Not consistent with western values.

Anonymous wrote:The pig is the poster demanding to see the queens legs to prove his point.

Appiah noticed none of you had anything to say about the photos from turkey, Indonesia, or Lebanon. Because it fails to support the stereotype you have in your heads.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:
Can you state specifically which polices a Muslim candidate in the US is likely to expose based on her religion that you would oppose? Is it the praying five times a day that you believe would be disqualifying? The chance that the President might go on the Haj? Is it the charity that the President would demonstrate? The fasting? Or, her simple profession of faith? I am having a really difficult time understanding why all Muslims should be unconstitutionally barred from the Presidency.

NP here

I'll give a simple example. Muslims due to religious reasons do not consume pork. If they supported a policy banning or restricting pork products I would be opposed. It really boils down to how willing said person is to imposing their believes onto the general public. Nothing wrong with them practicing their believes as an individual. There is only an issue when/if they impose their religious beliefs onto the general public.

Jews have the same restriction. Do you oppose Jewish presidents? Catholics are not supposed to eat meat on Friday. If you like to eat meat on Friday, do you oppose Catholic presidents?

Again, if an individual candidate espouses positions that you oppose, don't vote for him. What I don't understand is that Ben Carson and many posters here oppose a Muslim candidate regardless of any political positions that candidate had simply due to her religion.

Your not getting it are you. I'm not oppose if they practice those beliefs on a personal level. I oppose them imposing those beliefs upon the general public. So yes, I oppose any individual who puts religion above the common good no matter the Religion.

Are you saying it is OK for a President to put religion above the common good? To impose their beliefs onto the general public? I hope not.

No. Where did you ever get the idea that I support putting religion above the common good? You must be making the assumption that all Muslims would put religion above the common good. I do not think thatWhat is true. Why do you seem to think it is true? I oppose is having one standard for Muslims and one standard for everyone else. If you have one standard, then you and I are on the same page. I don't know why you would think that we have a disagreement.

That is because it is the only religion that has demonstrated that they will hurt you if you do not adhere to their way of life-they want to impose their way of life and their ultimate goal is to reign over the entire world. Why the hell do they want Sharia laws in Texas-assimilate or leave-if we pulled that stuff in their countries, they would kill us! Not consistent with western values.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a Muslim candidate for a president?

Jindal and Pataki.

Jindal was a Hindu, converted to Christianity. Pataki is Roman Catholic.

You're wrong. They're both Muslims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

Oh really? Yes they are required to cover head to toe and that's just the beginning. Show me one picture of a Muslim first lady whose hair is not covered and who is showing her legs. Just one. Please! Let's talk about honor killings, arranged marriages, women not being allowed to divorce abusive husbands. Pre-marital sex is considered a CRIME against Islam. I wouldn't want a sitting President in office who might be quietly sympathetic to any of these customs. And the liberal left is so up in arms over women's rights as far as abortion when it comes to Christianity. Notice you didn't mention Islam's stance on gays. Hypocrits. I agree with Ben Carson, I don't want a Muslim in office anymore than I would want a Religious zealot like Huckabee in the Presidency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam

Women aren't required to dress all in black or cover their faces. This is what you said originally.

Arranged marriages are arranged for men and women. Men don't like them any more than women do.

Premarital sex is a crime in Islam for both men and women.

Plus, you're kind of an idiot for challenging us to show an uncovered Muslim first lady, when there are so many examples of them.

Anonymous wrote:The pig is the poster demanding to see the queens legs to prove his point.

Appiah noticed none of you had anything to say about the photos from turkey, Indonesia, or Lebanon. Because it fails to support the stereotype you have in your heads.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a Muslim candidate for a president?

Jindal and Pataki.

Jindal was a Hindu, converted to Christianity. Pataki is Roman Catholic.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:
Can you state specifically which polices a Muslim candidate in the US is likely to expose based on her religion that you would oppose? Is it the praying five times a day that you believe would be disqualifying? The chance that the President might go on the Haj? Is it the charity that the President would demonstrate? The fasting? Or, her simple profession of faith? I am having a really difficult time understanding why all Muslims should be unconstitutionally barred from the Presidency.

NP here

I'll give a simple example. Muslims due to religious reasons do not consume pork. If they supported a policy banning or restricting pork products I would be opposed. It really boils down to how willing said person is to imposing their believes onto the general public. Nothing wrong with them practicing their believes as an individual. There is only an issue when/if they impose their religious beliefs onto the general public.

Jews have the same restriction. Do you oppose Jewish presidents? Catholics are not supposed to eat meat on Friday. If you like to eat meat on Friday, do you oppose Catholic presidents?

Again, if an individual candidate espouses positions that you oppose, don't vote for him. What I don't understand is that Ben Carson and many posters here oppose a Muslim candidate regardless of any political positions that candidate had simply due to her religion.

Your not getting it are you. I'm not oppose if they practice those beliefs on a personal level. I oppose them imposing those beliefs upon the general public. So yes, I oppose any individual who puts religion above the common good no matter the Religion.

Are you saying it is OK for a President to put religion above the common good? To impose their beliefs onto the general public? I hope not.

No. Where did you ever get the idea that I support putting religion above the common good? You must be making the assumption that all Muslims would put religion above the common good. I do not think thatWhat is true. Why do you seem to think it is true? I oppose is having one standard for Muslims and one standard for everyone else. If you have one standard, then you and I are on the same page. I don't know why you would think that we have a disagreement.