Dearborn responds to Angle comments

[PatrickSebast]

michiganmessenger.com/42502/dearborn-responds-to-angle-comments

politico.com/news/stories/1010/43451.html

I have to wonder how people like this get to the point where they are actually in competition for Senate seats. I would never dream of making the comments Angle made without checking my facts first even if I were posting on an internet forum, if I were in such a public position I would be all the more careful about what I said. Do people just not run for senate positions in some states or something? I would think there are better qualified people out there for this position.

 

[SamDash]

There’s nothing “false” about her claim. She’s obviously not referring to some “official” proclamation of Sharia law.

Muslims whine endlessly about religious “tolerance,” but again and again show that they view tolerance as a one-way street. The only areas in the U.S. without religious tolerance are those with high Muslim concentrations

The most outrageous example from Dearborn was the four Christians arrested and tried for the grave crime of passing out Christian literature outside a Muslim festival. Thankfully, they were acquitted, but that didn’t stop Mayor O’Reilly from bashing them, drawing condemnation from the Thomas More Law Center which defended the Christians. I put more credence in the Thomas More Law Center than Jack O’Reilly.

Beyond that, a wrestling coach in Dearborn recently settled a lawsuit in which he claimed the Muslim principal fired him for being a Christian. Two other teachers have sued claiming the principal harassed them for being non-Muslims.

A high school football team in Dearborn moved their practice to 11 PM-4 AM for Ramadan. As usual, non-Muslims must conform to Muslim mores even in non-Muslim areas.

 

[PatrickSebast]

There’s nothing “false” about her claim. She’s obviously not referring to some “official” proclamation of Sharia law.

Muslims whine endlessly about religious “tolerance,” but again and again show that they view tolerance as a one-way street. The only areas in the U.S. without religious tolerance are those with high Muslim concentrations

The most outrageous example from Dearborn was the four Christians arrested and tried for the grave crime of passing out Christian literature outside a Muslim festival. Thankfully, they were acquitted, but that didn’t stop Mayor O’Reilly from bashing them, drawing condemnation from the Thomas More Law Center which defended the Christians. I put more credence in the Thomas More Law Center than Jack O’Reilly.

Beyond that, a wrestling coach in Dearborn recently settled a lawsuit in which he claimed the Muslim principal fired him for being a Christian. Two other teachers have sued claiming the principal harassed them for being non-Muslims.

A high school football team in Dearborn moved their practice to 11 PM-4 AM for Ramadan. As usual, non-Muslims must conform to Muslim mores even in non-Muslim areas.

They were declared not guilty by a Dearborn jury in the first case, which demonstrates strong constitutional law as far as the public is concerned. Police making questionable decisions happens everywhere, so that certainly isn’t enough to put such a mark on a community, and it is also worth mentioning that there were 5 other Christian groups in attendance that didn’t have any problems.

The second example is the type of thing you could expect to see anywhere in America with some slight role changes. If a coach had participated in the conversion of Christians to the Muslim faith there would certainly be some angry parents and school board members. The coach was warned beforehand too, and while I don’t know that I would agree with the firing (the school hasn’t made it’s side public as far as I can tell so without the facts I wouldn’t make a final judgement) I can certainly see how the reverse could happen in a strongly evangelical district.

The third one is simply being practical. If a large percentage of the football team is unable to practice at certain times due to religious beliefs what option does a coach have besides moving practice in order to get the maximum possible number of people at practice. If you have a bunch of strict Jewish players you would avoid scheduling practices on the Sabbath too.

Anyway religious conflict is bound to spring up in areas with high levels of diversity, especially in countries where the issues haven’t really been touched on before. Associating the area with Sharia law is just mind boggling though. Possibly fear-mongering.

 

[autdrew]

They were declared not guilty by a Dearborn jury in the first case, which demonstrates strong constitutional law as far as the public is concerned. Police making questionable decisions happens everywhere, so that certainly isn’t enough to put such a mark on a community, and it is also worth mentioning that there were 5 other Christian groups in attendance that didn’t have any problems.

The second example is the type of thing you could expect to see anywhere in America with some slight role changes. If a coach had participated in the conversion of Christians to the Muslim faith there would certainly be some angry parents and school board members. The coach was warned beforehand too, and while I don’t know that I would agree with the firing (the school hasn’t made it’s side public as far as I can tell so without the facts I wouldn’t make a final judgement) I can certainly see how the reverse could happen in a strongly evangelical district.

The third one is simply being practical. If a large percentage of the football team is unable to practice at certain times due to religious beliefs what option does a coach have besides moving practice in order to get the maximum possible number of people at practice. If you have a bunch of strict Jewish players you would avoid scheduling practices on the Sabbath too.

Anyway religious conflict is bound to spring up in areas with high levels of diversity, especially in countries where the issues haven’t really been touched on before. Associating the area with Sharia law is just mind boggling though. Possibly fear-mongering.

This comment made me think you might not be very familiar with Dearborn, I grew up in Detroit, less than a mile away. There has been creeping Sharia for 20 yrs. It may not be obvious to some but oh boy, it is it ever!

 

[SamH]

There’s nothing “false” about her claim. She’s obviously not referring to some “official” proclamation of Sharia law.

Muslims whine endlessly about religious “tolerance,” but again and again show that they view tolerance as a one-way street. The only areas in the U.S. without religious tolerance are those with high Muslim concentrations

The most outrageous example from Dearborn was the four Christians arrested and tried for the grave crime of passing out Christian literature outside a Muslim festival. Thankfully, they were acquitted, but that didn’t stop Mayor O’Reilly from bashing them, drawing condemnation from the Thomas More Law Center which defended the Christians. I put more credence in the Thomas More Law Center than Jack O’Reilly.

Beyond that, a wrestling coach in Dearborn recently settled a lawsuit in which he claimed the Muslim principal fired him for being a Christian. Two other teachers have sued claiming the principal harassed them for being non-Muslims.

A high school football team in Dearborn moved their practice to 11 PM-4 AM for Ramadan. As usual, non-Muslims must conform to Muslim mores even in non-Muslim areas.

My I present the “Two Wrongs make a Right” arguement.

 

[SamH]

They were declared not guilty by a Dearborn jury in the first case, which demonstrates strong constitutional law as far as the public is concerned. Police making questionable decisions happens everywhere, so that certainly isn’t enough to put such a mark on a community, and it is also worth mentioning that there were 5 other Christian groups in attendance that didn’t have any problems.

The second example is the type of thing you could expect to see anywhere in America with some slight role changes. If a coach had participated in the conversion of Christians to the Muslim faith there would certainly be some angry parents and school board members. The coach was warned beforehand too, and while I don’t know that I would agree with the firing (the school hasn’t made it’s side public as far as I can tell so without the facts I wouldn’t make a final judgement) I can certainly see how the reverse could happen in a strongly evangelical district.

The third one is simply being practical. If a large percentage of the football team is unable to practice at certain times due to religious beliefs what option does a coach have besides moving practice in order to get the maximum possible number of people at practice. If you have a bunch of strict Jewish players you would avoid scheduling practices on the Sabbath too.

Anyway religious conflict is bound to spring up in areas with high levels of diversity, especially in countries where the issues haven’t really been touched on before. Associating the area with Sharia law is just mind boggling though. Possibly fear-mongering.

May I present the official “Two Wrongs make a Right” posting.

 

[PatrickSebast]

This comment made me think you might not be very familiar with Dearborn, I grew up in Detroit, less than a mile away. There has been creeping Sharia for 20 yrs. It may not be obvious to some but oh boy, it is it ever!

What proof do you have to offer for this, and what do you even think Sharia law means? Are you aware that different groups of Muslims view it differently?

 

[PatrickSebast]

May I present the official “Two Wrongs make a Right” posting.

That isn’t the position at all. My position is that there is no evidence of anything close to a push in this community for the enforcement of Sharia law and that the examples you gave don’t line up with it. All that has been shown is that some Muslims in Dearborn have done things politically that were religiously driven. This isn’t at all close to the fundamentalist Muslim version of Sharia Law that they seem to be claiming Dearborn is on the edge of.

 

[SamH]

That isn’t the position at all. My position is that there is no evidence of anything close to a push in this community for the enforcement of Sharia law and that the examples you gave don’t line up with it. All that has been shown is that some Muslims in Dearborn have done things politically that were religiously driven. This isn’t at all close to the fundamentalist Muslim version of Sharia Law that they seem to be claiming Dearborn is on the edge of.

I gave no examples. I simply commented on your take of how it’s OK for Muslims to suppress religious expression as long as it might be done by Christians too.

 

[RobbyS]

They were declared not guilty by a Dearborn jury in the first case, which demonstrates strong constitutional law as far as the public is concerned. Police making questionable decisions happens everywhere, so that certainly isn’t enough to put such a mark on a community, and it is also worth mentioning that there were 5 other Christian groups in attendance that didn’t have any problems.

The second example is the type of thing you could expect to see anywhere in America with some slight role changes. If a coach had participated in the conversion of Christians to the Muslim faith there would certainly be some angry parents and school board members. The coach was warned beforehand too, and while I don’t know that I would agree with the firing (the school hasn’t made it’s side public as far as I can tell so without the facts I wouldn’t make a final judgement) I can certainly see how the reverse could happen in a strongly evangelical district.

The third one is simply being practical. If a large percentage of the football team is unable to practice at certain times due to religious beliefs what option does a coach have besides moving practice in order to get the maximum possible number of people at practice. If you have a bunch of strict Jewish players you would avoid scheduling practices on the Sabbath too.

Anyway religious conflict is bound to spring up in areas with high levels of diversity, especially in countries where the issues haven’t really been touched on before. Associating the area with Sharia law is just mind boggling though. Possibly fear-mongering.

The fears may be justified where the party demanding change is stubborn in its faith. The Muslims are stubborn and intolerant themselves and of a mind where they are numerous enough to demand conformity to their sectarian customs. And all this in the face of our Law which really does not yield to similar demands from Christians, is itself stubbornly secular --except where it is confronted by Muslim demands, in which cases it rolls over. “Unfair” is a cheap word," but it applies here. One rule for all. Rulers who will not allow prayers in a football stadium that is filled with Christians but who then gives Muslims ritual footbaths–in some places-- is not being fair. It is the unfairness, the insult to injury, of a secularism that scorns Christianity but coddles Islam.

 

[RobbyS]

What proof do you have to offer for this, and what do you even think Sharia law means? Are you aware that different groups of Muslims view it differently?

There are different schools of that Law, but the point being made is that the authorities are complying with the wishes of the Muslims whose wishes are based on their desire to adhere to some form of Sharia law.

 

[RobbyS]

I gave no examples. I simply commented on your take of how it’s OK for Muslims to suppress religious expression as long as it might be done by Christians too.

Until the early '60s, most school districts generally accomodated the religious views of the majority in the districts, so that a school in Alabama was sort of like a Protestant church school, and a school in Massachusetts, sort of like a parochial school. That all changed, for good or ill. But now the authorities are trying to make accomodations for one religious sect that they will not make for others.

 

[SamH]

Until the early '60s, most school districts generally accomodated the religious views of the majority in the districts, so that a school in Alabama was sort of like a Protestant church school, and a school in Massachusetts, sort of like a parochial school. That all changed, for good or ill. But now the authorities are trying to make accomodations for one religious sect that they will not make for others.

Agreed.

 

[PatrickSebast]

The fears may be justified where the party demanding change is stubborn in its faith. The Muslims are stubborn and intolerant themselves and of a mind where they are numerous enough to demand conformity to their sectarian customs. And all this in the face of our Law which really does not yield to similar demands from Christians, is itself stubbornly secular --except where it is confronted by Muslim demands, in which cases it rolls over. “Unfair” is a cheap word," but it applies here. One rule for all. Rulers who will not allow prayers in a football stadium that is filled with Christians but who then gives Muslims ritual footbaths–in some places-- is not being fair. It is the unfairness, the insult to injury, of a secularism that scorns Christianity but coddles Islam.

But where is the evidence of these things. All that has been established is that Muslims have influence in the community. No one has given any examples of even one singular Muslim, much less a group trying to impose any form of Sharia Law, much less trying to circumvent constitutional law. Where was there an instance in this town where Christians were denied prayer and Muslims were given footbaths? What examples can you give to show that the Muslim community in Dearborn is stubborn and intolerant? A community having conflicts doesn’t mean that the community is bad, almost every community has disputes over things like politics and religion. Claiming that Dearborn is somehow a special case and is comparable to a, as Sharron Angle phrased it “militant terrorist situation” because it had conflicts revolving around the Muslim faith is not honest.

Unless of course there is still some missing proof that Dearborn is trying to impose things like stonings and head coverings on its citizens. If there is proof of something like this then I will admit my wrong in claiming that Sharron is demonstrating a lack of responsibility/qualification for the senate seat. So far nothing has been offered to back the claims and when journalists go to Dearborn they never seem to find anyone who feels overly threatened by the Muslim community.

 

[TMC]

This fear of Sharia law seems to be the new popular bugaboo, but it seems to me to be irrational and baseless. I have yet to see a single example of a US court imposing Sharia law on anyone. I am aware that sometimes Muslims contract with each other in ways that are consistent with their beliefs. That is nothing new and Orthodox Jews do the same. But I have never seen Sharia imposed on anyone in the US. Is there a single instance of that occuring?

 

[PatrickSebast]

I gave no examples. I simply commented on your take of how it’s OK for Muslims to suppress religious expression as long as it might be done by Christians too.

I didn’t say it was okay for them to do it, I was trying to address the double standard that when Christians do it no one tries to claim they are attempting to institutionalize a new theocracy. Our very own Church sometimes tells us to get involved with political issues, and what stances to take on them, but it wouldn’t be accurate to suggest that Catholic’s were trying to impose the Pope as a sort of political leader/dictator on America like he was in medieval Europe. There is a huge gap between religion getting involved in politics and using religion to try and impose certain politics.

 

[RobbyS]

But where is the evidence of these things. All that has been established is that Muslims have influence in the community. No one has given any examples of even one singular Muslim, much less a group trying to impose any form of Sharia Law, much less trying to circumvent constitutional law. Where was there an instance in this town where Christians were denied prayer and Muslims were given footbaths? What examples can you give to show that the Muslim community in Dearborn is stubborn and intolerant? A community having conflicts doesn’t mean that the community is bad, almost every community has disputes over things like politics and religion. Claiming that Dearborn is somehow a special case and is comparable to a, as Sharron Angle phrased it “militant terrorist situation” because it had conflicts revolving around the Muslim faith is not honest.

Unless of course there is still some missing proof that Dearborn is trying to impose things like stonings and head coverings on its citizens. If there is proof of something like this then I will admit my wrong in claiming that Sharron is demonstrating a lack of responsibility/qualification for the senate seat. So far nothing has been offered to back the claims and when journalists go to Dearborn they never seem to find anyone who feels overly threatened by the Muslim community.

Angle is allowed make rhetorical arguments based on exaggerations. Muslims have been demanding since 9/11 that we treat them with kid gloves. There is --to use your standard–little to substantiate the claims of Islamphobia advanced daily. Yet the mayor of New York feels free to say that there is danger, that the people of New York are supposed to endure what is plainly a slap in the face. And, truth be told, he is peeved because the objection is really directed and him and other city-officials – blind/indifferent to public feelings–approved this thing. And at the sam time they refused to cut a deal with the Orthodox Church.

 

[PatrickSebast]

Angle is allowed make rhetorical arguments based on exaggerations. Muslims have been demanding since 9/11 that we treat them with kid gloves. There is --to use your standard–little to substantiate the claims of Islamphobia advanced daily. Yet the mayor of New York feels free to say that there is danger, that the people of New York are supposed to endure what is plainly a slap in the face. And, truth be told, he is peeved because the objection is really directed and him and other city-officials – blind/indifferent to public feelings–approved this thing. And at the sam time they refused to cut a deal with the Orthodox Church.

That is a completely different issue, and again has nothing to do with Sharia Law. In fact it is because of constitutional law that Muslims are allowed to build there. And yes Angle is allowed to make these statements, but when she makes them they display that she either lacks competence or honesty.

 

[RobbyS]

I didn’t say it was okay for them to do it, I was trying to address the double standard that when Christians do it no one tries to claim they are attempting to institutionalize a new theocracy. Our very own Church sometimes tells us to get involved with political issues, and what stances to take on them, but it wouldn’t be accurate to suggest that Catholic’s were trying to impose the Pope as a sort of political leader/dictator on America like he was in medieval Europe. There is a huge gap between religion getting involved in politics and using religion to try and impose certain politics.

As a matter of fact, the term theocracy is thrown around quite a bit by secularists who are opposed to every aspect of our culture that is specifically Christian.

 

[Darryl1958]

I didn’t say it was okay for them to do it, I was trying to address the double standard that when Christians do it no one tries to claim they are attempting to institutionalize a new theocracy. Our very own Church sometimes tells us to get involved with political issues, and what stances to take on them, but it wouldn’t be accurate to suggest that Catholic’s were trying to impose the Pope as a sort of political leader/dictator on America like he was in medieval Europe. There is a huge gap between religion getting involved in politics and using religion to try and impose certain politics.

When Christians do it, they are accused of trying to institutionalize a new theocracy, shoving their morality down others throats, and a whole host of other things.