Why not do a swap of Democrats that want out of the USA for Conservatives that want out of Canada. I’m willing to make the sacrifice.

rhuppertz on October 24, 2006 at 10:53 PM

Come on over rhuppertz – no need to wait for a swap. Besides, the beauty is the libs are free to go wherever they want. Ultimately, most end up staying. Shucks!

Hate crimes laws invoke the “thought police.” And who is it that will get to decide what the accused was thinking? If you kill someone because you hated them, how uncommon is that? Why should the fact that you hated them add extra years to the sentence? How often do people kill people that they really like?

Let’s concentrate on what is provable in the courts and leave the “Thought Police” in the unemployment line. There are already too many examples of Christians being prosecuted under hate crime laws for no other reason than stating the scriptural fact that homosexuality is a sin. But we don’t want to kill homosexuals, and we don’t even hate them, but the fact is, it is sinful, and to remain true to one’s faith, you MUST be allowed to say it.

Linking hate crime laws to religion wouldn’t even get serious consideration if it were not for the extreme and vile acts currently being committed under Islam, the “religion of peace.” Islam will destroy religious freedoms everywhere if we don’t deal with it the right way.

The way we need to deal with Islam is to recognize that it is NOT a Religion. Religion is something that motivates people to feed the hungry, no matter who those hungry people are. Or to help the needy, no matter who those needy might be. True religions motivate people to do good for all mankind, without regard to any fact other than there are people in need. All true religions value all human life and seek to protect the innocence.

Islam fails at being a religion on all of these counts, it is not a religion and should not be afforded such a grand and revered status. Islam needs to be recognized for what it is, a political movement, just like the Nazis. Islam seeks to conquer the world by force, just like the Nazis. Islam is intolerant of religion and seeks to destroy all religion, just like the Nazis. Islam is a political force of evil in the world that forces it’s laws upon you and enslaves you, or kills you, just like the Nazis. Islam seeks to establish its own political empire called the Caliph, something like “The Third Reich.”

Once America recognizes Islam as nothing more than another evil political movement that seeks world domination by force, it can be banned, just like the Bahth party was banned in Iraq. Islamist could then be given a choice, convert to ANY religion, or simply renounce Islam. But if they insist on remaining Islamic, then they must move to an Islamic country.

We simply cannot afford Constitutional protection to the “kill everyone who is not Islamic crowd.” And we don’t need hate crime laws either, we had better never go down that road or we will all be guilty much sooner than you think.

Apparently, I’m also the only one left who really needs a preview window too.

Nah, we all need a preview window. Hey, AP, how about like over at Patterico’s blog, real-time preview as you type. ;-)

A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention….

Completely OT, but I really hate videos. Am I the only left who logs onto the net to read?

JM Hanes on October 25, 2006 at 4:10 AM

I feel your pain. But no stopping it. I’ve been around since the web was green and the words were white; but one thing about this massive thing we’ve created: there are so many people and opinions and ways of doing things that you can always find a comfortable corner somewhere that’s just about right.

Besides, Michelle and Allah read like the books are melting and link like they love the color blue, so there’s no lack anyway :)

I don’t think any American minority is so imperiled at this point in our history that they’re needed, except possibly women vis-a-vis domestic abuse.

Except that women are actually the majority in this country.

Hate Crime laws are heinous. Punish the act, not the thought.

I’ve been to Toronto, Canada and it’s a nice place tho a little colder than I like.

Americans and Canadians would be better off writing antiterrorism statutes that have some meat in them.

But we don’t need to keep flirting with “hate-crime” language to do it. Hate-crime language keeps trying to address underlying ideologies. It’s possible to ban acts, and even ban acts with particular intents, without ever addressing underlying ideologies directly.

The “international terrorism” definition AP linked requires an intent definition, because terrorism is a particular act committed for a particular reason; a complete definition of terrorism requires both “what” and “for what reason” components. But the underlying “Why” is never defined (and shouldn’t be) because it doesn’t matter.

They make sense in societies where a minority group is subjected to such pervasive persecution that it’s worth impinging on freedom of thought to deter further persecutorial acts by criminalizing prejudice against them.

I completely disagree.–Because the criminal acts themselves are already criminal acts, and because the one thing these laws never do is “criminalize the prejudice against them;” if anything, they intensify it, and heap resentment onto the pile.

By the way, I’m not arguing they don’t work. I don’t know. I’m just too idealistic and not nearly pragmatic enough to throw the baby out with the bath-water, which is the way these laws hit me.

Why not do a swap of Democrats that want out of the USA for Conservatives that want out of Canada.

I second that!

Because 1) Quebec will never separate and all the new Dems would vote to stay in Canada which would cause 2) even more of my family’s tax dollars to support that socialist province.

I would rather move south.

How about we just move all the Liberals in America to Qebec. Then wait til 2015.

Why not do a swap of Democrats that want out of the USA for Conservatives that want out of Canada. I’m willing to make the sacrifice.