PC is what makes liberals who value human rights and freedom want to give it away to the islamomorons:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Ar...Quran_Hate.htm

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”

“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”

“How perverse are Muslims!”

“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”

“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”

“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

Hate speech? Incitement to violence? Sounds like it to us, but a knowledgeable Muslim would have to disagree.

Why would Muslims not consider this to be hate speech? How is it that we can post these quotes with full certainty that CAIR won't be contacting the media (or Congress) with wild-eyed accusations of Islamophobia?

Well, for one thing, we don’t actually agree with any of these statements, of course. But the real reason is that Muslims themselves honestly believe these quotes to be the literal, eternal word of Allah. In fact, CAIR is promoting this hate speech on their own website! It is actively propagating the very literature that contains these comments, even while sanctimoniously claiming that it is working against hate and violence.

But… isn't CAIR a Muslim organization? What’s the catch?

Well, if you haven’t guessed it already, these are quotes from the Qur’an in which we've replaced the word ‘Christian’, ‘Jew’ or ‘unbeliever’ with the word ‘Muslim.’

Here is how they actually appear in the literature that groups like CAIR are pushing:

Sura (8:55) - Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve

Sura (48:29) - Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves

Sura (9:30) - And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah... Allah (Himself) fights against them. How perverse are they!

Sura (8:12) - I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

Sura (9:123) - O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness

Sura (5:33) - The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement

These verses come from five different places in the Qur’an. There are dozens of others scattered throughout that advocate violence in open-ended fashion. There are hundreds more that speak of hatred and hell toward Christians, Jews, and other non-believers. (Is it any wonder that the Muslim world is split largely between those who tacitly support Islamic terror and those who do nothing about it?)

Very few of these verses are bound by historical context within the text of the Qur’an, and any appeal to external sources for mitigation would apply also to the tiny handful of verses that are used (disingenuously) to promote Islam as being loving and tolerant. More importantly, there are far more violent verses than ones of tolerance, and most were “revealed” later, thus abrogating the handful of earlier ones.

And yet, this is the book that CAIR wants people to read! This is what CAIR considers to be holy text, even to the extent that an exact replica of the Qur’an (grammatical errors and all) is said to be on a table in heaven guarded by angels.

So, the next time you hear CAIR smugly accusing its critics of “hate speech,” just remember what the organization's agenda really is:

They don’t mind hate speech directed at non-Muslims. In fact, they promote it.

They don't mind religious minorities being denied rights that Muslims have in Muslims societies. In fact, they plug fatwas and religious literature that encourage discrimination.

They don't even mind the vast amount of terrorism in the name of Islam. In fact, they refuse to acknowledge and denounce more than 99% of it, including the on-going genocide against black Africans by Arabs.

The language of civil rights and tolerance is merely a tool of convenience for prominent Muslim organizations in the West to advance the cause of Islamic supremacy. A true civil rights organization, however, is concerned about rights for all people, regardless of race or religion, and this is something that Islam has never been able to produce... and probably never will...

At least according to our Qur’an!

__________________
Qur'an:8:39 Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.
Qur'an:8:67 It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughter in the land.
Qur'an 8:12 I will terrorize the unbelievers...Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.
Qur'an 9:5 Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

I did your google search. 95%+ of the links had nothing to do with middle easterners. I also used Muslim instead of middle easterner, and it yielded just as few links.

I did see MANY white supremicist and extreme right wing web sites. But none of these had any actual stories. They were all hear say articles about "A Rancher says 'I heard muslims are crossing'"

If you did any research at all you would quickly find that Canada HAS a radical muslim population, and a very porous border.
If a radical muslim wanted to enter the USA, Canada is where they should go.

Please stop conflating terrorism with every single issue you feel strongly about.

Second point,
The OT is considered part of the bible, and you can't get through a single sermon without some preacher mentioning it or an "important" passage from it.

The portion about stoning children is about 4 lines away from the portion on rejecting homosexuality.

If you could just point me to the portion of the bible, where Jesus mentions homosexuals, I will buy a "God hates fags dead" sign from the local evangelical church.

Did you know that Jesus said usury is a sin? A very BIG sin. Do your religious beliefs prevent you from utilizing banks and credit cards?

In summary, don't play the old testament versus new, because you will always end up picking and choosing passages you agree with against those you don't. In the end, your religion is probably based 100% on your upbringing and personal philosophy, and has little to do with the bible.


Ixtellor

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

And, well, for the sake of context... while it might be petty and often ridiculous, it is NOT killing the nation.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Agreed. In fact, it's quite the opposite. We on the left have used 'political correctness' as a tool for infulencing first the behaviour, and then the thoughts of the masses in preperation for passing laws controlling these things. Our current major PC campaign is "man-made global warming" with which we plan to return human existence to the levels existing in the 17th century, whereby we will find it easier to control the masses for other projects designed for societal well-being.

1. PC is pointless... and you know that because posts like this are what make it most obvious that you are a right-winger either using satire or providing a strawman to get right-wing talking points across.
2. Global warming, even in its current lame political argument form, is in no way a form of PC.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

I beleive it is.

A study reported the other day claimed that global warming "may be on hold for a decade or two" . WHAT? That is so completely contradictory to the claims of steady repeated cumulative damage happening every day that cars are driven and cows flatulate.

It seems to me like this is somebody's project now, and when evidence come sto light that the theory is flawed, then it has to be explained away with ridiculous statements like "well its just on hold for a few decades. The American public are such suckers for a guy who claims to be a "scientist".

Most of the people arguing in the public, whether for or against global warming, are not the scientists. And the positions of scientists are not explained well.
Science is about determining problems. Politics is about determining solutions... and you can guarantee that every interest group known to man is going to be jumping in to a debate that holds the very future of our existence in question...
And when the science itself is pointing to an issue that is in part badly reflective on some major interest groups, you can expect the interest groups to get vocal.

So why is it that the people who claim there is man-made global warming are PC... but the interest groups that throw all kinds of money into attempting to take the heat off their industries are not- seems to me they are just as political.

Really the science is pretty divided by how much humans affect global warming. Pretty much everyone is in agreement that there is global warming... but like most things it's effects are not 100% predictable to us.
When politics focuses too much on the end it's on now... we end up with dumb solutions. On the left there are calls for too little, too late cuts in emissions that will do nothing but make it look like we're doing something (well, I suppose technology to cut emissions may be helpful in the long run, but it's not a solution to the problem). On the right we're just getting calls to ignore it and keep on going because a fiction novelist and a few theoreticians with little knowledge of climate have come to the conclusion that it doesn't exist... and some scientists have claimed that other sources are more significant than human contribution (which does not mean that there is no human contribution and does not mean that it's not a problem).

This is the problem when scientifically illiterate politicians and biased interest groups are the primary spokesmen for an issue and the audience is a scientifically illiterate population.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Well, we've successfully used PC to silence dissenters by intimidating them with ridicule. This has always been the use of "Political Correctness".............in fact, its never had any other function.

It doesn't work.
PC only works in that way when it involves markets, whether private business or public politics. And then it is not so much a purposefully created thing as a symptom of having to sell something to diverse markets.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Yeah? What about words no longer tolerated publically, like "faggot," "queer," and the "N-word." How can you think Political Correctness hasn't worked..............??