Evidence for God from Science

It might surprise you to know but Muslims are voting for Trump because they understand the threat Islamic terrorism poses.Obama is using this issue to take guns away but he is also thinking that if he points out Trump is dangerous calling for a ban and it is a slippery slope Muslims will not vote for Trump,but he is wrong.Muslims understand the threat better than anybody else.I've heard many Muslims explain why they are voting for Trump and agree with a temporary ban.

Kurieuo wrote:But, we're not talking about Facebook posts Melanie, we're talking about our good friend here RickD. And all of us here now every single one of his 14000 or so posts are full of substance... well, at least those he does write in a more serious manner when he's not trying to make someone laugh.

So RickD posted a link, perhaps he agreed with most of what that guy wrote when he read it. So then you come along and call the guy a "right wing crackpot" RickD would feel what? The same way you'd feel if you posted a link to a page you largely agreed with, and then someone just dismisses it out of hand responding it is clear that the person who wrote the page has no brain and is a twit. Though any personal jab may be unintentional, it would still be personally felt.

Anyway, that's my two cents, so we've now got four.

K,

FYI, the author is a she not a he. And, I didn't research the info in the article, so I didn't agree nor disagree with what was in the article. I already stated that I posted it for the sake of discussion. To give a differing viewpoint than what Mel just gave.

And Mel just dismissing the content of the article because the owner of the website is a right wing crackpot, and the writer of the article doesn't have qualifications to write the article, just shows Mel's bias against those who hold a different political view. And as such, it's a completely dishonest way to have a discussion.

Mel rails on about not being prejudiced against certain religions or races, yet she did the exact same thing. She showed her prejudice against those she considers "right wing".

It's just hypocritical and dishonest.

Is there any particular reason we are talking so much about weapons instead of Islamic belief? Because it wasn't a weapon that sprouted legs and walked into the Pulse night club...

Hortator wrote:Is there any particular reason we are talking so much about weapons instead of Islamic belief? Because it wasn't a weapon that sprouted legs and walked into the Pulse night club...

Because the liberal left wants to make the issue about gun control, instead of stopping the PC bs, and calling it what it is. A war against militant Muslims.

Instead of their ideology, and those following it, being the real problem, the libs want to shift blame to the US, and its gun laws.

RickD wrote:

Hortator wrote:Is there any particular reason we are talking so much about weapons instead of Islamic belief? Because it wasn't a weapon that sprouted legs and walked into the Pulse night club...

Because the liberal left wants to make the issue about gun control, instead of stopping the PC bs, and calling it what it is. A war against militant Muslims.

Instead of their ideology, and those following it, being the real problem, the libs want to shift blame to the US, and its gun laws.

Well said, Rick. So, I say we don't fall for that trap, and continue to point at the real cause of this tragedy:

ACB, you're just repeating the same points that I've addressed several times, most of your facts are incorrect, and no amount of evidence seems likely to change your mind (as least if it comes from me), so screw it.

That said, I find it really frustrating and kind of sad that you continue to say things like this:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm against same sex marriages because the Supreme Court does not have the right to write new law and it was forced onto America against its will.I would have no problem had the American people voted it in,but that did not happen.

That's not what happened. That's not how our government works. Unfortunately you're not going to believe anything I tell you, even if it's just a basic civics lesson.

Could an American Christian please tell ACB how our government works, or at least gently but firmly inform him that his understanding of the process is completely wrong and point him in the direction of a remedial civics lesson? The poor guy is embarrassing himself.

And just to be clear, I'm not asking anyone to defend marriage equality. I'm asking someone to explain the roles of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of our government, the difference between writing a new law and finding an existing law unconstitutional, the source of the Supreme Court's power to interpret the Constitution, and the complete irrelevancy of whether or not anyone voted for the law that was overturned. You know, Civics 101...

Here is a story of actual importance regarding the massacre in Florida,

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/06 ... responded/

Omar Mateen wrote:“I pledge my alliance to [ISIS leader] abu bakr al Baghdadi..may Allah accept me,” Mateen wrote in a post early Sunday morning. “The real muslims will never accept the filthy ways of the west. … You kill innocent women and children by doing us airstrikes..now taste the Islamic state vengeance.”

“It is my understanding that Omar Mateen used Facebook before and during the attack to search for and post terrorism-related content,” Ron Johnson, Senate Homeland Security Chair said. Emphasis my own.

Facebook has, so far, been cooperating with federal investigations into Mateen's links to ISIS. But Senator Johnson has set a deadline for June 29th, 2 weeks, to hand over every scrap of data on him.

"In his final post, he made sinister prediction, writing, “In the next few days you will see attacks from the Islamic state in the usa.”

edwardmurphy wrote:ACB, you're just repeating the same points that I've addressed several times, most of your facts are incorrect, and no amount of evidence seems likely to change your mind (as least if it comes from me), so screw it.

That said, I find it really frustrating and kind of sad that you continue to say things like this:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm against same sex marriages because the Supreme Court does not have the right to write new law and it was forced onto America against its will.I would have no problem had the American people voted it in,but that did not happen.

That's not what happened. That's not how our government works. Unfortunately you're not going to believe anything I tell you, even if it's just a basic civics lesson.

Could an American Christian please tell ACB how our government works, or at least gently but firmly inform him that his understanding of the process is completely wrong and point him in the direction of a remedial civics lesson? The poor guy is embarrassing himself.

And just to be clear, I'm not asking anyone to defend marriage equality. I'm asking someone to explain the roles of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of our government, the difference between writing a new law and finding an existing law unconstitutional, the source of the Supreme Court's power to interpret the Constitution, and the complete irrelevancy of whether or not anyone voted for the law that was overturned. You know, Civics 101...

I'm not embarrassing myself at all.You ignore how many Islamic terrorist attacks have happened and try to equate it to normal crime,somehow. You just agree with the ruling of the US Supreme Court but have ignored or forgotten what "We the people" means.You've got it backwards from the way things were set-up.To you,you like the idea of "We the government" and this is the difference.You ignored before that the people voted NO to same sex marriages in every state where it was put to a vote,even in very liberal states,you ignore this and try to show polls now that shows the majority of American's accept it now. This ruling on same sex marriages by the US Suprm!e Court would be like say it was put to a vote that only Christians can own a business and in every state,even in the most conservative state the people voted NO to it,then the US Supreme Court ruled later and made it a law that only Christians can own a business. You'd then know how we feel.

For those looking for some connection between gun laws and terrorism, here you go.

And ACB, no. You don't understand the process, but I can see that you're comfortable in your blinders so I guess you're free to remain ignorant.

edwardmurphy wrote:For those looking for some connection between gun laws and terrorism, here you go.

And ACB, no. You don't understand the process, but I can see that you're comfortable in your blinders so I guess you're free to remain ignorant.

Nope,you are not only ignorant but suicidal also.You want to see more Americans die from Islamic terrorist attacks and this is why you don't mind Obama flooding our countries with Muslims while thousands of investigations are already going on by the FBI and they warn that we have sleeper cells in America,you ignore it and say come on in and kill us.


You also ignore that I have been warning for months on here that Obama is setting us up for Islamic terrorist attacks.I predicted we would see them and I'm right and you are wrong. And we are going to see more,just like I said.I do not know the future,but all you gotta do is listen to the FBI.But I have been warning about future Islamic terrorist attacks in America,while you downplayed it.Yet I am right and you are wrong and you will continue to be wrong when we do see Islamic terrorist attacks in America just like I predicted based off my research.Your research is proving you wrong and me right.

abelcainsbrother wrote:Nope,you are not only ignorant but suicidal also.

Not at all. I just happen to believe that, regardless of whether or not he uses some stupid phrase that pundits and morons are obsessed with, the guy that ordered the raid that killed bin Laden takes terrorism seriously. I happen to agree with him when he says that declaring ourselves to be in direct conflict with the world's second largest religion is idiotic, counterproductive and dangerous. Incidentally, his political opponents generally agree with him, with the exception of one loud-mouthed, ignorant, pumpkin-headed buffoon.

abelcainsbrother wrote:You want to see more Americans die from Islamic terrorist attacks and this is why you don't mind Obama flooding our countries with Muslims while thousands of investigations are already going on by the FBI and they warn that we have sleeper cells in America,you ignore it and say come on in and kill us.

Again, no. You've been taken in by hyperbolic rhetoric and your irrational fear has overwhelmed your ability to think critically, assuming that you ever possessed it in the first place.

abelcainsbrother wrote:You also ignore that I have been warning for months on here that Obama is setting us up for Islamic terrorist attacks.I predicted we would see them and I'm right and you are wrong. And we are going to see more,just like I said.I do not know the future,but all you gotta do is listen to the FBI.

Actually, I haven't been ignoring any of that. I've been expecting more attacks for years. And yes, we're likely to see even more, partly because that terrorist mouthpiece is right - the US is a free society where just about anyone can easily get a military-style rifle with a high-capacity clip, and that makes us incredibly vulnerable to lone-wolf homicidal maniacs of all stripes. That said, Muslim terrorists are still not an existential threat to our country. The larger threat is that we'll give away all of our freedom to fear-mongering politicians and we'll never get it back.

The other part that you're missing is that the attacks we've seen were carried out by American citizens, not by refugees or immigrants. Making Muslims feel increasingly stigmatized and unwelcome isn't going to make things better. In fact, when that idiot that you worship talks about instituting a national Muslim registry or an open-ended ban on Muslim immigration it allows extremists to argue that we're just as bad as they claim we are. ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and all the rest want to frame this conflict as being between Islam and the West, and reactionary fools like Trump are playing right into their hands.

abelcainsbrother wrote:But I have been warning about future Islamic terrorist attacks in America,while you downplayed it.Yet I am right and you are wrong and you will continue to be wrong when we do see Islamic terrorist attacks in America just like I predicted based off my research.Your research is proving you wrong and me right.

That first part is a lie, your "research" is a joke, and no, there's really not much that you're right about.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:For those looking for some connection between gun laws and terrorism, here you go.

And ACB, no. You don't understand the process, but I can see that you're comfortable in your blinders so I guess you're free to remain ignorant.

Nope,you are not only ignorant but suicidal also.You want to see more Americans die from Islamic terrorist attacks and this is why you don't mind Obama flooding our countries with Muslims while thousands of investigations are already going on by the FBI and they warn that we have sleeper cells in America,you ignore it and say come on in and kill us.


You also ignore that I have been warning for months on here that Obama is setting us up for Islamic terrorist attacks.I predicted we would see them and I'm right and you are wrong. And we are going to see more,just like I said.I do not know the future,but all you gotta do is listen to the FBI.But I have been warning about future Islamic terrorist attacks in America,while you downplayed it.Yet I am right and you are wrong and you will continue to be wrong when we do see Islamic terrorist attacks in America just like I predicted based off my research.Your research is proving you wrong and me right.

Actually, Abel, I beat you to it a few years ago when I wrote that because of endless meddling in the middle east, drone strikes killing children and innocent people, America is creating a new generation of militants who see America as a bully and they will retaliate somehow. It is easy to recruit people who had suffered collateral damage. The hate doesn't come from religion alone it also comes from lots of other things.

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:But, we're not talking about Facebook posts Melanie, we're talking about our good friend here RickD. And all of us here now every single one of his 14000 or so posts are full of substance... well, at least those he does write in a more serious manner when he's not trying to make someone laugh.

So RickD posted a link, perhaps he agreed with most of what that guy wrote when he read it. So then you come along and call the guy a "right wing crackpot" RickD would feel what? The same way you'd feel if you posted a link to a page you largely agreed with, and then someone just dismisses it out of hand responding it is clear that the person who wrote the page has no brain and is a twit. Though any personal jab may be unintentional, it would still be personally felt.

Anyway, that's my two cents, so we've now got four.

K,

FYI, the author is a she not a he. And, I didn't research the info in the article, so I didn't agree nor disagree with what was in the article. I already stated that I posted it for the sake of discussion. To give a differing viewpoint than what Mel just gave.

And Mel just dismissing the content of the article because the owner of the website is a right wing crackpot, and the writer of the article doesn't have qualifications to write the article, just shows Mel's bias against those who hold a different political view. And as such, it's a completely dishonest way to have a discussion.

Mel rails on about not being prejudiced against certain religions or races, yet she did the exact same thing. She showed her prejudice against those she considers "right wing".

It's just hypocritical and dishonest.

Rick the reason I dismissed the article wasn't because I was being predijuced against a 'right wing' but because when I read the article there was no verifiable data or proof. I clicked on the links within the article and it didn't lead me to anything that could be defined as info that would lead a person to your assertion.....
Rick said

Apparently the current vetting process doesn't work. At least here in the US.

Your posting for sake of discussion had a very clear overtune that you believed that the vetting process did not work.
Perhaps if it was for discussions sake a more accurate way to have introduced the article should have remained more neutral.
I had no intention of discussing this again but you have now accused me of being dishonest and prejudiced. At no point did I make this personal against you, none of my posts questioned you per say but rather the author and the webpage owner.
I understand that you took it personal and I am partly to blame for that because even though I didn't insult you directly I can see how it could have been taken that way and that isn't cool on my part.
Combative posting just isn't doesn't make for good discussion. I totally take ownership of my part to play and for that I apologise.
But to suggest I was being dishonest and predujiced is taking what was already an emotional discussion to a whole other level.
I wish I could reword my posts to be a whole lot more diplomatic as my intention was never to offend you as clearly I have and I think we need to hug And move along.